integrated crop-livestock conservation agriculture - ICARDA Corporate ...

Integrated Crop-Livestock Conservation Agriculture for Sustainable Intensification of Cereal-based Systems in Central and West Asia and North Africa

INTEGRATED CROP-LIVESTOCK CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE

Strategic Practical Options for Integrating Conservation Agriculture Cropping and Livestock Systems

Project completion report December 2016

FOR SUSTAINABLE INTENSIFICATION OF CEREAL-BASED SYSTEMS IN CENTRAL AND WEST ASIA AND NORTH AFRICA

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

IFAD GRANT # I-R-1393-ICARDA ICARDA Project No. 1317/1316/1315/1314

INTEGRATED CROP-LIVESTOCK CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE FOR SUSTAINABLE INTENSIFICATION OF CEREAL-BASED SYSTEMS IN CENTRAL AND WEST ASIA AND NORTH AFRICA International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas I-R-1393-ICARDA 23 January 2013 - 22 January 2016

i TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms and abbreviations................................................................................................. ii Tables...................................................................................................................................... iii Figures.................................................................................................................................... iv Background............................................................................................................................. 5 Review of performance and achievements against outputs, by project component...... 9 Output 1.1. Ex ante evaluation of CA based technologies in CWANA............................... 10 Methodological framework/tools............................................................................... 10 Data sources............................................................................................................. 10 Results and achievements........................................................................................ 12 Conclusions............................................................................................................... 23 Output 1.2. Enhanced crop-livestock integration in CA through optimized stubble grazing strategies and increased fodder availability from forages or fodder shrubs....................... 34 Methods.................................................................................................................... 36 Main results............................................................................................................... 36 Output 1.3. Site-specific CA technology packages fine-tuned and disseminated for enhanced farm productivity, resource use efficiency, and profitability................................ 45 Activities and achievements...................................................................................... 48 Output 2.1. Capacity development, co-learning, knowledge, and information dissemination in the target areas and across the CWANA region.............................................................. 50 Implementation arrangements............................................................................................ 52 Innovation.............................................................................................................................. 53 Knowledge management..................................................................................................... 59 Scaling up and sustainability............................................................................................... 61 Monitoring and evaluation................................................................................................... 63 Financial and fiduciary management................................................................................. 69 Conclusions and lessons learned....................................................................................... 70 Annexes................................................................................................................................. 73

ii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ACIAR

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

CA

Conservation agriculture

CANA

Conservation agriculture for North Africa

CBR

Cost-benefit ratio

CLCA

Crop-livestock conservation agriculture

CV

Conventional agriculture

CWANA

Central West Asia and North Africa

DZD

Algerian Dinar

FEAST

Feed assessment tool

FU

Forage unit

ICARDA

International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas

IFAD

International Fund for Agricultural Development

INGC

Institut National des Grandes Cultures (Tunisie)

INRAT

Institut National de Recherche Agronomique de Tunisie

IRR

Internal rate of return

ITGC

Institut Technique des Grandes Cultures (Algérie)

MEL

Monitoring, evaluation and learning platform

M&E

Monitoring and evaluation

NARS

National agricultural research services

NARES

National agricultural research and extension services

NR

Net returns

PCA

Principal components analysis

R&D

Research and development

SMSA

Mutual Association of Agricultural Services

TAAS

Tajik Academy of Agricultural Sciences

TC

Total costs

TJS

Tajik Somoni

TND

Tunisian Dinar

TR

Total revenues

USD

United States Dollar

WANA

West Asia and North Africa

ZT

Zero tillage

iii TABLES Table 1. Level of completion of activities under Output 1.1......................................... 11 Table 2. Structural characteristics of cropping systems and livestock production of the identified farmers’ groups in the Algerian study area............................................. 13 Table 3. Structural characteristics of cropping systems and livestock production of the identified farmers’ groups in the Tunisian study area............................................. 14 Table 4. Structural characteristics of cropping systems and livestock production of the identified farmers groups in the Tajik study area.................................................... 15 Table 5. Average gross product, costs and gross margin for 1 ha of wheat under conventional and conservation agriculture practices (2012/13 cropping season) in Tunisia........................................................................................................................... 17 Table 6. Average costs repartitioning according to the conventional and conservation agriculture practices (2012/13 cropping season) in Tunisia.......................................... 17 Table 7. Cost-benefit analysis of CA versus CV technology using partial budget analysis (average for 1 ha of Durum Wheat during 2013/14 cropping season) in Tunisia............... 18 Table 8. Cost-benefit analysis of CA versus CV technology using partial budget analysis (2013-2014 cropping year) in Algeria (DZD/ha)............................................... 20 Table 9. Cost-benefit analysis of CA versus CV technology using partial budget analysis (2014/15 cropping year) in Algeria (DZD/ha)................................................... 21 Table 10. Cost-benefit analysis of CA versus CV technology using partial budget analysis (2014/15 cropping year) in Tajikistan............................................................... 21 Table 11. Economic evaluation: wheat sowing dates under CA in Algeria................... 26 Table 12. Economic evaluation of grazing under CA in Algeria.................................... 26 Table 13. Level of completion of activities under Output 1.2....................................... 35 Table 14. Level of completion of activities under Output 1.3....................................... 47 Table 15. Number of on-farm (F) and on-station (S) experiments established in each country.......................................................................................................................... 49 Table 16. Level of completion of activities under Output 2.1....................................... 51

iv FIGURES Figure 1. Locations for project implementation in the different countries....................... 8 Figure 2. Steps in constructing a farm typology............................................................ 12 Figure 3. Canonical discriminant functions showing the different farmers’ groups identified using the K-hierarchical clustering.................................................................. 16 Figure 4. Residual stubble in Algerian fields: original image (left) and VegMeasure processed image (right).................................................................................................. 38 Figure 5. Relationship between biomass and grazing period under CV........................ 39 Figure 6. Relationship between biomass and grazing period under CA........................ 39 Figure 7. Relationship between stocking density and number of grazing days when ensuring a residual biomass of at least 0.6 t/ha in on-farm stubble grazing trials under CA (M’Sila-Algeria).......................................................................................................... 39 Figure 8. Biomass yield variation (dry matter t/ha) during grazing for both wheat stubble and vetch paddocks when grazed once or twice per day.............................................. 41 Figure 9. Forage yield of legume-cereal mixtures under no till and conventional tillage.. 43 Figure 10. Forage yield of legume-cereal mixtures under no till and conventional tillage.44 Figure 11. The workshop of the recently established TAAS Agricultural Machinery Research Unit, featuring the John Shearer ZT seed drill................................................ 62

05

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Background

BACKGROUND

T

he three countries involved in this project (Algeria, Tunisia, and Tajikistan), like most other countries in the region, are confronted with growing populations, increased urbanization and changing food

demands and preferences. Food and livelihood security of rural populations in these countries depend largely on crop-livestock production systems. Crop productivity and biomass are typically low under low rainfall dryland agricultural systems because of abiotic stresses and low levels of inputs. Moreover, increased frequencies of droughts and climatic risks further exacerbate abiotic stresses. For all countries in Central, West Asia and North Africa (CWANA), environmental threats related to climate

change and water scarcity, weak socioeconomic policies, and demographic and technological drivers constrain agricultural productivity. Conservation agriculture (CA) principles, including no tillage, crop residue cover, and crop rotation/intercropping, have proved to be key interventions for enhancing crop productivity and improving resource-use efficiency and soil health. Work on CA in Algeria started in the 2004/05 cropping season and is more recent than in neighboring Tunisia, where CA has been promoted since the late 1990s, mainly in large farms in favorable agro-ecological zones. For medium- and small-sized farms, the lack of technical options, such as suitable farm implements (manual, animal powered, and small tractor powered), compounded by the need to use crop residues as animal feed are considered major constraints to the adoption of CA. In the dry zones of both countries, cereal grains, mainly barley, straws, and stubbles, are the main feed resources. To our knowledge, there are no data showing whether integrated croplivestock production systems would benefit from CA adoption in terms of productivity and sustainability. In Tajikistan, CA is largely unknown among the farming population. Tajikistan is facing a serious increase in soil erosion as a consequence of rugged terrain, frequent heavy showers, and weak soil resistance. This susceptibility to erosion underlines the need for technologies that include CA to combat soil erosion and degradation, and appropriate agricultural systems to improve soil and crop quality.


The current project was designed to address the concerns noted above, with specifically designed approaches that build on past experiences and acquired knowledge. The project should be seen as not yet another program on CA, but as a truly integrated program seeking to develop strategic practical options for integrating CA cropping and livestock systems. It, therefore, sought to reconcile the demand by livestock for feed with residue retention under CA.

Recipient organizations The International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) and national agricultural research and extension services (NARES) in CWANA (Algeria, Tunisia, Tajikistan).

Goal To enhance the sustainability of natural resource use, increase farm profitability, and improve the livelihoods of resource-poor farmers through largescale adoption of CA technologies capitalizing on the system synergies of crops, livestock, and soils in the drylands of CWANA.

Component 1: Analyzing current constraints and opportunities for the adoption of CLCA systems and identifying their related trade-offs in the project sites of the CWANA region. I.

Objective Through integrated and participatory research approaches with farmers, NARES will develop and

Ex ante evaluation for CA-based technologies in CWANA, through proposed activities and milestones

II. Enhanced crop-livestock integration in

test innovative technologies (i.e. reduced tillage)

CA through optimized stubble grazing

and management (i.e. improved cropping options)

strategies and increased fodder availability

options and practices (i.e. residue management

from forages or fodder shrubs

through restricted grazing) to understand the adoption of integrated crop-livestock conservation agriculture (CLCA) by smallholder farmers in the CWANA region.

III. Site-specific CA technology packages finetuned and disseminated for enhanced farm productivity, resource use efficiency, and profitability. Component 2: Knowledge management and

Components

dissemination of CLCA in the CWANA region.

The project consisted of two main components

IV. Capacity development, co-learning, and

made up of four outputs. Each output consists of

knowledge and information dissemination

several activities against which achievements will

in the target areas and across the CWANA

be reported in subsequent sections.

region.

06

07


Target Groups Three major groups were targeted in the project: i.

Resource poor farmers whose livelihoods depend on mixed livestock/cropping systems in the targeted low rainfall regions, will be the direct beneficiaries. Productivity is expected to increase by 10%. At least 1000 households will be targeted in selected countries. This represents a total of 10,000 family members, including women, in the target communities who will benefit from the proposed project activities. Ultimately, other rural communities in similar agro-ecologies across CWANA will benefit from the improved options identified and promoted by the project.

ii. NARES research and development (R&D) partners will have access to new and innovative information which will be disseminated. Extension agents will be direct beneficiaries with a needs assessment and targeted capacity building being carried out for the improved dissemination of new technology packages. iii. Policy-maker frameworks will be exposed to the new integrated CLCA technologies at both district and national levels, which will improve the resilience and adaptation of rural families to climate change and improve their living standard.

Target Countries and Areas Tunisia The Governorate of Siliana (Figure 1), the target location of the project in Tunisia, has a semi-arid climate, with a rainfall of 300-450 mm, and an average temperature of 18°C. The topography is a mix of plains and hilly areas, and the soils are light textured and low in organic matter. The farming system is an integrated cereal (durum wheat and barley) and livestock (sheep and goats) one. Within Siliana, the districts of Krib, Aroussa, and Chouarnia were selected as the main activity sites.

Algeria M’Sila Province is located in the high plateaus in the east central region of Algeria (Figure 1). The administrative center of the Wilaya is located 248 km southeast of the capital, Algiers. It covers an area of 18,175 km², has 15 districts, 47 municipalities (of which 16 are rural), and has 148,037 households. The average annual rainfall is between 250 and 300 mm. The poverty level of this region is ranked as ‛very precarious’. The predominant production system is a cereal-livestock one (with a cereal-fallow rotation) and extends over a wide area. M’Sila Province has a cereal-based system associated with sheep pastoralism (an agro-pastoral system). Sétif location was selected for the on-station grazing research.

Tajikistan Initially three activity sites were selected (Figure 1). The Rasht Valley site was dropped in the 2013/14 cropping year by a decision of the Steering Committee, primarily because the production system is more forestrangeland-livestock based, where cropping is limited and also because of the difficulty of accessing the site.

The Gissar Valley The experimental farm of the Tajik Research Institute of Farming is located in the Sharora settlement, in the Gissar district, 18 km from the capital, Dushanbe. The experimental farm occupies 669 ha of land, consisting of 271 ha of irrigated and 398 ha of rainfed farm land. The altitude is 800-850 m above sea level and average rainfall varies between 600 and 800 mm. The target region hosts 12,241 people and 2,282 households, with most households having small numbers of animals. The farm economy is based on wheat (60%), cotton (25%), and fodder (15%) production in the irrigated areas, while in rainfed areas winter wheat, chickpea, flax, alfalfa, and sainfoin are grown.

08


Fergana Valley The Fergana Valley is located 350 km from Dushanbe and 32 km from the city of Khujand. It has a common border with the Tashkent Province of Uzbekistan, in the north. In the target region, irrigated farmland accounts for 1549 ha, rainfed farmland accounts for 212 ha, and rangeland accounts for 2891 ha. The climate is dry and moderately hot. The air temperature during summer can reach a maximum of 45°C, while the average air temperature is 14°C. The average annual rainfall ranges from 300 to 400 mm, which is suitable for winter wheat cultivation in the rainfed areas. Public cooperative agricultural enterprises currently own several thousands of hectares of arable, rainfed, and pasture land across the Fergana Valley.

Rasht Valley The total area of Jirgatal, which was selected as the target village within the Rash Valley, is 58,229 ha. Rangelands make up 95.4% (55,529 ha including 900 ha of hayfields) of the farmland, with the remaining 4.6% being arable land (2700 ha). The majority of the livestock is reared on small- and medium-sized farms. The climate at the target site is strongly continental, with hot summers and cold winters, with an average frost free period of 200 to 220 days. The average January temperature is −6°C, with a minimum temperature of −34°C. July tends to be the hottest month, with an average monthly temperature of 21.6°C, while the maximum temperature is 38°C. The average annual precipitation, which is concentrated in the winter and spring, ranges from 575 to 600 mm, with a winter snow cover of 50 to 100 cm. The Muk and Sukhrob Rivers are the main sources of water and are used to irrigate agricultural crops at the Jirgatal site.

Figure 1. Locations for project implementation in the different countries

Left Algeria; middle Tunisia; right Tajikistan

M’Sila

Sétif

Siliana

Fergana

Gissar

Grant Approval, Effectiveness and Closing Dates The grant was officially approved 23 January 2013 for a period of three years. The official closing date was 31 March 2016. The approved funds were USD 1,500,000; the value disbursed up to March 2016 was USD 1,412,959 with a pending fund balance of USD 57,047.

09

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Review of performance

REVIEW OF PERFORMANCE & ACHIEVEMENTS AGAINST OUTPUTS, BY PROJECT COMPONENT

T

he project consisted of two main components targeting four expected outputs. The activities undertaken by the

project team generated most of the expected outputs, as described in the Project Log Frame reporting. The following sections provide a summary of the degree to which specific project outputs and activities have been completed (as of March 2016). The relative level of completion of the specific outputs and activities is supported by additional comments, data, and other explanations.


OUTPUT 1.1. Ex ante evaluation of

CA based technologies in CWANA The overall objective of this first output is to identify the opportunities for and constraints to large scale adoption of the CLCA packages in regions where small ruminant activities are a highly significant component of livestock production in low-rainfall agricultural systems. The key activities of this output, as reported in Table 1, have been achieved through: •

Repeated rapid rural surveys and focus group meetings to assess the farmers’ behavioral changes towards crop-livestock integration under CA practices

•

Well-designed and implemented household surveys and farm typologies to assess likely project impacts on farmers

•

Characterization of farmers’ perceptions of the CA potential and appraising the degree of adoption over the life of the project for the three countries

•

Assessing and determining the optimal livestock production and CA cropping systems for the different study areas.

After a quick summary of the methodological frameworks, tools, and data sources used in the different activities, the results and findings of this first output will be presented for each of the six activities.

METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK/TOOLS The following methods were used to respond to the research questions and lead to the following objectives: • • • • • • • •

Qualitative/descriptive analysis (percentages, means, maximums, standard deviations, frequencies) Repeated rapid rural and participatory rural approaches Cost-benefit analysis: partial budget analysis ADOPT (based on focus group meetings) Quantitative (econometric) analysis Analysis of economic, social and environmental indicators Cluster analysis to generate farm typologies based on their crops-livestock integration levels Farm modeling using mathematical programming.

DATA SOURCES • • • • • • •

Secondary data (technical reports, national statistics, international literature, etc.) Households surveys (baseline survey) Focus groups meetings Experts’ meetings Key stakeholders’ meetings Biophysical CLCA team (agronomic, livestock data, etc.) Repeated short questionnaires/farmers.

10

11


Table 1. Level of completion of activities under Output 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE INTERVENTION INCLUDING VERIFIABLE INDICATORS

COMMENTS

A. Outputs 1.1. Ex ante evaluation of CA based technologies in CWANA Strategies for promoting uptake and out scaling of CA practices by month 36

100% completed for the Tajik, Algerian, and Tunisian platforms

B. Activities 1.1.1. Development of baseline data on farming and tillage practices, crop choices, and farmer perceptions, in the target regions. New farm surveys will be conducted using a representative random sample of the farming community, including data on crop-residue management, feeding strategies, resource-flow maps for ex ante analysis.

100% completed for the three platforms. Survey implemented, data collected and analyzed, and reports delivered

Baseline data collected by month 6 1.1.2. Expert estimates of the agronomic benefits of CA options will be systematically solicited from researchers and extension staff where on-farm data is not available Ex ante economic analyses of CA technologies completed by month 18

1.1.3. An economic evaluation, including a financial risk assessment, will be made of the CA technologies and trade-offs that farmers face

1.1.4. Optimal livestock production and CA cropping systems will be determined for different farming systems under different costs and prices scenarios Optimal production under different scenarios developed and shared with stakeholders 1.1.5. Monitor the adoption of CA technologies with follow up surveys and identify constraints to and determinants of adoption

100% completed for the Tunisian, Algerian, and Tajik platforms (reports delivered)

100% completed for the Tunisian, Algerian, and Tajik platforms (reports delivered) 70% completed (optimization model developed and trade-offs assessed for Tunisia. Trade-offs and optimization objectives and constraints were only identified and described in the case of Tajikistan and Algeria, without any empirical modeling work)

100% completed for the three platforms

The dissemination of CA documented 1.1.6. Identify gendered limitations and advantages that can promote adoption of CA and determine if CA will increase the labor burden on women The impact of CA on women documented

100% completed for the Tunisian and Algerian platforms (sections included in the baseline reports delivered)


RESULTS AND ACHIEVEMENTS Activity 1.1.1. Develop baseline data on farming and tillage practices, crop choices, and farmer perceptions, in the target regions.

Figure 2. Steps in constructing a farm typology

Research/development objective

Data collection was successfully accomplished through 1164 surveys – Tunisia 364, Algeria 400, and Tajikistan 400. Secondary data were collected during the early stages of project implementation to back up the sampling procedure. Design and piloting of household/ farm questionnaires was conducted in partnership with local and national partners. Enumerators received appropriate training before going into the field for data

DIVERSE FARMING SYSTEMS

collection. Data entry and cleaning were also conducted by the national research partners. In particular, the survey collected comprehensive data about current cropping systems, including the rationales for crop choices, farming and tillage practices, residue management, feeding strategies, and perceptions about CA. A set of variables reflecting main attributes of

First assessment and hypothesis formulation: based on: expert knowledge, rapid rural appraisals, bibliography data.

crop and livestock integration in the studied areas was selected to identify farm typologies in the three countries. The selection of appropriate variables for the clustering analysis is a key step in the typology process (Figure 2). These chosen variables should strongly reflect the

Data collection

objective for which the typology is being conducted. In this project the objective was to depict farm types based on their level of integration of livestock and cropping activities. Thus, the different variables chosen reflected

Selection of key variables

the land use and feeding strategies, in addition to the structural characteristic of the farms (area, size of the flock, costs and incomes, etc.). Characteristics of the farming systems in Algeria, Tunisia, and Tajikistan, as well as the different farm types drawn from the data analysis,

Multivariate analysis & cluster analysis

can be found in Tables 2, 3, and 4, respectively. To conduct farm typologies, we used cluster analysis, which finds a homogeneous grouping of farmers based on their levels of integration between crop and livestock activities. A standard factor analysis (also called principal component analysis [PCA]) followed by a K-means cluster analysis was conducted for this purpose. The factor analysis describes a large data set using a smaller number of uncorrelated variables, called factors. These factors can then be used in a clustering multivariate analysis technique to sort samples (farmers in our case)

HOMOGENEOUS FARM TYPES

12

13


into homogenous groups. Ideally, cluster analysis is performed on the principal components. The PCA can be viewed as a method for removing ‛noise’. It separates the signal from the noise (the first dimensions extract the essentials of the information while the latter ones identify the noise). Without noise in the data, the clustering is more stable and provides accurate farm typologies. In the case of Algeria, and based on the identified grouping factors used for the clustering analysis, the farmers’ groups can be qualified as follows (see Table 2 for more details): •

GROUP 1: Most of the farmers in the sample belong to this type (the dominant farm type). These are medium-scale farmers with a large proportion of irrigated land. Livestock is the major activity generating most of the farm income. Rangeland grazing provides the highest share of feed followed by forage crops

•

GROUP 2: Farm animals grazing on large rangeland and in wheat stubble areas. Livestock is the most important activity for this farm type; it constitutes, on average, 91% of the total farm income

•

GROUP 3: This group contains only two outlier farmers

•

GROUP 4: Large-scale farmers with significant rangeland areas owned or rented. Rangeland biomass is contributing around half of the feed requirement of the livestock. The proportion of income generated from the livestock activity is much lower than in the other groups

Table 2. Structural characteristics of cropping systems and livestock production of the identified farmers’ groups in the Algerian study area FARM TYPE 1

FARM TYPE 2

FARM TYPE 3

FARM TYPE 4

Total agricultural area (ha)

33.52

112.67

267.00

101.60

Total rangeland area owned or rented (ha)

5.90

36.22

50.00

63.60

Total irrigated area (ha)

7.54

4.44

187.00

4.53

Irrigated area proportion (%)

22.49

3.94

70.04

4.46

Total number of small ruminants

138.97

246.33

2,425.00

177.87

2,453.64

4,200.00

47,250.00

3,453.33

71.21

90.11

91.00

39.33

Proportion of rangeland grazing in the total feeding quantity (%)

35.20

37.14

25.00

49.12

Proportion of forage crops in total feed (%)

23.58

20.00

25.00

21.05

Proportion of straw in total feed (%)

20.10

20.95

25.00

12.28

Proportion of grains in total feed (%)

21.12

21.90

25.00

17.54

Area of wheat stubble grazed (ha)

40.73

104.00

10.00

199.73

Number of cases in each cluster

251

9

2

15

90.61

3.25

0.72

5.41

Structural characteristics

Total income from animal sales (DZD 1000) Proportion of income drawn from the livestock activity (%) Livestock feeding strategies

Proportion of farmers in each case (%) Source: CLCA project elaboration (2016). DZD 1000 = USD 9.097

14


In the case of •

Tunisia, the overall characteristics of the identified farmers’ groups are (see also Table 3):

GROUP 1: Heavy grazers of wheat straw and rangeland, low integration between crops and livestock systems (farmers are mostly cultivating wheat with very limited areas for forage/feed production)

•

GROUP 2: Medium-sized farm, with a low number of small ruminants and enhanced crop rotation (including legume crops)

•

GROUP 3: This group contains just one outlier farmer

•

GROUP 4: Large-scale farms combining high numbers of small ruminants and enhanced crop rotation. Farmers in this group also use wheat stubble and rangeland for grazing their animals.

Table 3. Structural characteristics of cropping systems and livestock production of the identified farmers’ groups in the Tunisian study area FARM TYPE 1

FARM TYPE 2

FARM TYPE 3

FARM TYPE 4

Total agricultural area (ha)

13.59

21.95

750

54.82

Number of plots

4.76

3.95

2

8.5

Number of eroded plots

1.40

0.91

0

1.35

Small ruminants (number of heads)

19.02

2.50

200

138.64

Ratio (heads of small ruminants/total agricultural area)

3.50

0.46

0.26

3.56

Durum wheat (ha)

2.23

4.56

80

16

Soft wheat (ha)

0.78

2.98

40

2.28

Barley (ha)

3.15

4.50

150

15.57

Oats (ha)

0.98

1.90

100

3.14

Legume crop 1 (ha)

0.13

1.48

0

0.71

Legume crop 2 (ha)

0.07

0.13

25

0

Total feeding costs (TND)

2,048.96

60.24

20,700

14,645.71

Total livestock costs (TND)

1,970.91

60.24

20,700

14,645.71

Total income from livestock sales (TND)

4,729.74

206.04

60,000

43,230

-

0.49

150

88.92

Quantity of concentrates used as feed (ton)

0.81

0.04

10

7.71

Quantity of barley used as feed (ton)

1.56

0.03

8

9.42

Quantity of wheat bran used as feed (ton)

0.50

0

2

1.42

Straw: number of bales used for feed

64.85

1.76

700

481.42

139

4.06

1500

875

Area of wheat stubble grazed (ha)

21.80

0.22

430

50.35

Number of grazing days on wheat stubble

94.13

0.98

90

92.14

Wheat stubble: (number of grazing hours/day)

7.54

0

8

8.57

Area of rangeland grazed (ha)

8.10

0.16

100

23.5

Structural variables

Cropping systems (average areas of cultivated crops)

Costs and income of the livestock activity

Number of heads sold Livestock feeding strategies

Hay: number of bales used for feed

15


FARM TYPE 1

FARM TYPE 2

FARM TYPE 3

FARM TYPE 4

Number of months of rangeland grazing

9.65

0.11

5

9.71

Number of cases in each group

259

91

1

14

70.96

24.93

0.27

3.84

Livestock feeding strategies

Proportion of each group (%) Source: CLCA project elaboration (2016). TND100 = USD 46.625

Finally, the study of Tajikistan revealed the following farm types (see also Table 4): •

GROUP 1: Only one case observed. Considered as an outlier observation

•

GROUP 2: Farmers in this group are oriented to irrigated crop production systems with a high number of animals on the farm. No stubble grazing is done by these farmers

•

GROUP 3: Smallholder livestock specialists, with large area of pasture land rented, and rented stubble grazing

•

GROUP 4: Large-scale farmers with no irrigation and a large number of animals on the farm.

Table 4. Structural characteristics of cropping systems and livestock production of the identified farmers’ groups in the Tajik study area FARM TYPE 2

FARM TYPE 3

FARM TYPE 4

Structural variables: agricultural areas and livestock Total agricultural area (ha)

94.59

25.81

140.65

Total irrigated area (ha)

93.86

8.78

0.00

Rain fed area (ha)

0.00

4.15

0.00

Pasture land owned or rented (ha)

10.40

11.60

0.00

Number of small ruminants

62.73

5.61

95.00

No use of straw

Use of straw as animal feed

No use of straw

15

418

2

Use of straw for animal feed (dummy variable) Number in each case Source: CLCA project elaboration (2016).

The distribution of farmers within each farm type and case study are presented in Figure 3; the cluster diagrams were drawn using discriminant function analysis, which performs a multivariate test of differences between the groups in each study case. The distribution of farm types within each case study indicates how strongly the discriminating (clustering) variables are differentiating between individual farms. In all study areas, the derived factors (from the selected variables) for our analysis were explaining more than 70% of the total variance between individual observations.


16

Figure 3. Canonical discriminant functions showing the different farmers’ groups identified using the K-hierarchical clustering

Tunisia (top left), Algeria (top right), and Tajikistan (bottom).

Source: Project data-baseline survey.

Activity 1.1.2. Consultations with biophysical experts to fill in the gaps in the estimates of the agronomic benefits of the CA options in the CLCA systems studied Consultations with biophysical scientists started at an early stage in the development of the economic evaluation and risk assessment. ICARDA and national scientists were consulted during the development of the survey in order to include their data requirements and comments. We also worked in close collaboration with biophysical scientists to quantify the economic benefits under different agronomic (livestock) conservation practices.

Activity 1.1.3. Economic evaluation and financial risk assessment of the CA technologies Producers benefit from the adoption of a new technology through the opportunities to lower production costs, either by increasing outputs from the same inputs or by maintaining the same output from reduced inputs under their integrated crop-livestock farming systems. Technologies, such as CA, may change the levels of inputs used, production costs (including livestock,) and crop profitability per unit of land. Thus, an accurate understanding of the changes in production costs and benefits induced by the adoption of a CA system is crucial for a better understanding of the potential diffusion of this integrated system among

17


small-farmers. The following analytical sections are in two parts. First, we economically evaluate CA technology versus conventional cropping in a crop-livestock integrated system. Second, we present the results of an economic assessment of the trade-offs of the different technology options proposed by the CLCA project under the crop-livestock and CA cropping systems.

Economic evaluation of CA technologies options proposed by the CLCA project Tunisian platform In Tunisia, the dominant cropping system in the study area is cereal-based (durum wheat, barley, and oats). The practiced crop rotation involves some legumes. Faba bean is the main cultivated legume. Other crops, such as potato, pepper, and watermelon, are also grown; but the number of observations and the area occupied are not significant. Table 5 shows the distribution of gross margins and costs for 1 ha of wheat under conventional agriculture (CV) and CA practices for the 2012/13 cropping season. Table 6 shows the repartitioning of the costs. This was calculated from data collected in the baseline survey. CA reduced machinery use by about six hours. Despite this significant difference in the number of hours, total machinery costs under CA was still high. Primarily, this was a consequence of the rental price of the direct seeders, which varied between TND 45/hour and TND 55/hour. The overall gross margin for CA was lower than for CV because of the higher seed and herbicide costs and a small reduction in the gross product. From this gross margin analysis, CA has a higher return to machinery, labor, and fertilizers than do conventional practices. CA responds much better to improved soil fertility management, as shown by the higher returns to mineral fertilizer use. The mechanization of CA will definitely encourage farmers to adopt CA as it will substantially reduce the labor required in the first years of adoption. Table 5. Average gross product, costs and gross margin for 1 ha of wheat under CV and CA (2012/13 cropping season) in Tunisia CONVENTIONAL AGRICULTURE (CV)

CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE (CA)

1,117.85

1,052.94

Average costs (TND/ha)

579.40

660.5

Average gross margin (TND/ha)

538.45

392.44

Average gross product (TND/ha)

Source: CLCA project elaboration (2015). TND 100 = USD 46.625

Table 6. Average costs repartitioning according to the conventional and conservation agriculture practices (2012/13 cropping season) in Tunisia CONVENTIONAL AGRICULTURE (CV) Cost (TND/ha)

Proportion (%)

CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE (CA) Cost (TND/ha)

Proportion (%)

Machinery

175.13

30.23

115.45

17.48

Labor

78.24

13.50

57.55

8.71

Seeds

132.91

22.94

186.98

28.31

Fertilizers

145.00

25.03

130.63

19.78

Pesticides/herbicides 48.06

8.29

169.82

25.71

Total

100

660.5

100

579.40

Source: CLCA project elaboration (2015). TND 100 = USD 46.625

18


A more detailed cost-benefit analysis of wheat under CV and CA systems was undertaken for the Tunisian platform from data and information collected through targeted focus group discussions with participating farmers during the 2013/14 cropping season. The results indicate that, on average, the adoption of a CA system implies a reduction of about 10% or USD 44.11/ha in the total production costs (Table 7). Corresponding with the results from the baseline survey, an increase in seed cost was observed when shifting from CV to CA system. The seed cost is expected to decrease when farmers have learned to better adjust the CA seeders. The adoption of CA requires effective weed control, especially before sowing, and this caused an increase in pesticide/herbicide costs of about 136%. Such an increase in the cost of these inputs compared to the conventional farming practices in the first years of adopting CA is a challenge for most smallholder farmers who otherwise might be interested in CA cropping. The cost-benefit ratio (CBR) under CA was 1.92. A CBR of 1.0 means that the initial investment (adoption) is recovered over the life of the investment (assuming a minimum of 15 years in this case). Thus, ratios higher than one imply a return on capital greater than the discount rate used (6% in the Tunisian case). In this case, although, total revenues and the CBR were slightly higher in CV, CA still has a high return on capital invested. Table 7. Cost-benefit analysis of CA versus CV technology using partial budget analysis (average for 1 ha of durum wheat during the 2013/14 cropping season) in Tunisia CONVENTIONAL AGRICULTURE (CV)


Quantity

Unit price (TND)

Total (TND)

Quantity

Unit price (TND)

Total (TND)

159

0.770

122.430

180

0.770

138.600

Inputs Seed (kg) Fertilizer

155.000

137.000

Herbicides

19.000

45.000

Labor (days/ha)

5.57

12.000

Fuel Machinery use (hours/ha)

66.840

4.83

12.000

0.000 8.11

170.350

Total costs

57.960 0.000

2.55

110.950

533.620

489.510

Revenue (TND/ha) Main product Secondary product

1.65

580

957

1.466

580

850.28

56

3.500

196

25

3.5

87.5

Total revenue

1153

937.78

423.38

448.270

Indicators Net returns (TND/ha) Proportional change in net revenue (%)

5.88%

Proportional change in total costs (%)

-8.27%


-71.12%

Cost-benefit ratio Source: CLCA project elaboration (2015). TND 100 = USD 46.625

2.16

1.92

19


The results show the economic potential of CA farming in the long term and, consequently, it is considered a viable option for smallholder farmers in Tunisia, particularly for those localized in high potential areas. Furthermore, the saving in labor time and the possibility of sowing earlier, as well as the environmental benefits, have not been quantified in this evaluation.

Algerian platform Characteristics of the livestock activity in Algerian action sites The livestock sector is contributing about 32% to the total Algerian agricultural gross domestic product (in 2015). However, research on the characterization and a performance analysis of livestock systems in the country show that this is still low. In the framework of the CLCA project, baseline data collected during the cropping season 2013/14 was used to characterize these systems in both the Algerian action sites of the project (Ain Khadra and Ouled Mansour). Results of this characterization show that 79% of the farmers surveyed in both areas are livestock keepers. The proportion is higher in Ouled Mansour, (82% of the total farmers surveyed) than in Ain Khadra (75%). In both communities, the survey identified 53,158 head of small and large ruminants – 45,243 head of sheep, 6025 goats and 1890 cattle. Most (67%) of the livestock flocks identified through our survey were to be found in Ouled Mansour with the balance (33%) being located in Ain Khadra. The statistics also showed the high proportion of sheep (85%) compared to goats (11%) and cattle (4%). The average number of head per farm is about 158 for sheep, 11 for cattle and 45 for goats. On average, the livestock activity contributes about 61% of the farm income in Ain Khadra and 55% in Ouled Mansour. Cropping activities contribute 38% to farm income in Ain Khadra and 34% in Ouled Mansour. Cost-benefit analysis of CA in Algeria The results of the cost-benefit analysis for the different cropping activities under CA in Algeria are reported in Table 8 for the 2013/14 cropping season and in Table 9 for the 2014/15 one. Results from cost-benefit analysis for 2013/14 were based on data collected through focus group meetings. This information was gathered from six farmers following the conventional system (with an average flock size of 20 head) and six farmers using CA (with an average flock size of 20 to 30 head except for one farmer who kept 160 head of sheep). The results from this empirical analysis show that in Ain Khadra, the CBR was around 2.3 for farmers who practiced CA against 2.55 for farmers who did not. The difference in CBR for CA can be explained by the fact that during the first year, farmers in Ain Khadra were investing slightly higher amounts in production costs.

20


Table 8. Cost-benefit analysis of CA versus CV technology using partial budget analysis (2013/14 cropping year) in Algeria CONVENTIONAL AGRICULTURE (CV)


Sowing (DZD/ha)

2,833

2,500

Fertilization (nitrogen and phosphate) (DZD/ha)

8,417

12,000

0

6,400

3,467

3,600

350

250

Machines (DZD/ha)

25,267

19,900

Total crop production costs (TC)

40,334

44,650

Crop revenues (DZD/ha)

103,000

102,500

Net return (NR)

63,017

57,850

ITEMS

Herbicides (DZD/ha) Labor (DZD/ha) Fuel (DZD/ha)

Indicators Proportional change in net return (%)

-8.2

Proportional change in total costs (%)

10.7


-76.6

Cost-benefit ratio

2.55

2.30

Source: CLCA project elaboration (2015).

These results correspond to the site of Ain Khadra. The Ouled Mansour region experienced an unforeseen and uncontrollable weather event, hence we did not include this region in the current calculations. DZD 1000 = USD 9.097

In the second cropping season 2014/15, the number of participating farmers increased to 15 in Ain Khadra and 14 in Ouled Mansour. The net revenue per hectare under CA increased substantially. The results indicate that total expenses are usually slightly higher among farmers who practiced the entire package of CA, including herbicides, compared to farmers who do not use herbicides and who achieved significantly larger incomes and higher CBRs. The CBRs in Ain Khadra was higher in 2014/15 at 3.7 for CA and 3.2 for conventional farming. In the previous cropping season (2013/14), the same CBRs were 2.3 for CA and 2.55 for CV. This indicates a positive trend with CA becoming more profitable than CV. This difference between both cropping seasons is mainly the result of the increase in net return (see Table 9). In Ouled Mansour, the ratios were about 3.8 for CA against 4.0 for CV. It is also important to mention that in both communities production costs were slightly higher under CA as compared to conventional farming. Herbicide, fertilizer, and machinery costs were responsible for this difference in the total cost between both production techniques. However, data from the 2014/15 cropping season also showed that crop revenues as well as the net returns are slightly higher under CA.

21


Table 9. Cost-benefit analysis of CA versus CV technology using partial budget analysis (2014/15 cropping year) in Algeria (DZD/ha) AIN KHADRA ITEMS

OULED MANSOUR

Conventional agriculture (CV)

Conservation agriculture (CA)

Conventional agriculture (CV)

Conservation agriculture (CA)

Total costs (DZD/ha)

45,299

52,104

54,836

60,572

Crop revenues (DZD/ha)

144,433

195,179

221,391

230,581

Net return (DZD/ha)

99,135

143,075

166,555

170,009

Indicators Proportional change in net returns (%)

44.3

2.1

Proportional change in total costs (DZD/ha)

15.0

10.5


3.0

0.2

Cost-benefit ratio

3.2

3.7

4.0

3.8

Source: CLCA project elaboration (2015). DZD 1000 = USD 9.097

Tajikistan platform The net benefits from no-till mung bean and soybean were USD 1061/ha and USD 1539/ha, respectively; both much higher than that from maize (USD 574/ha) under no-till. In the conventional system the net benefits from mung bean were USD 813/ha and from soybean were USD 1272/ha. Both were lower than the benefits achieved under CA and both were slightly higher than that for maize (USD 597/ha) (Table 10). Under CA, the CBR for maize was 1.98, that for mung bean 4.02, and that for soybean 4.61. These were all higher than the corresponding CBR under CV (mung bean 1.94, maize 3.08, and soybean 3.75). Table 10. Cost-benefit analysis of CA versus CV technology using partial budget analysis (2014/15 cropping year) in Tajikistan CONVENTIONAL AGRICULTURE (CV)


Maize

Mung bean

Soybean

Maize

Mung bean

Soybean

4,108

1,204

1,737

3,864

1,412

1,965

0.3

1

1

0.3

1

1

1,232

1,204

1,737

1,159

1,412

1,965

Production cost (USD/ha)

635

391

465

585

351

426

Net return (USD/ha)

597

813

1272

574

1,061

1,539

1.94

3.08

3.75

1.98

4.02

4.61

Grain yield (kg/ha) Grain yield price (USD/kg) Total income (USD/ha)

Indicators Cost-benefit ratio

CV vs CA Maize

Mung bean

Soybean

Change in net return (%)

−0.059

0.172

0.131

Change in Total costs (%)

−0.0784

−0.102

−0.084

22


CONVENTIONAL AGRICULTURE (CV)


Indicators CV vs CA Internal rate of returns (IRR)

Maize

Mung bean

Soybean

0.7525

−1.687

−1.56

Source: CLCA project elaboration (2015).

Values are in US dollars. The IRR is a metric used in capital budgeting which measures the profitability of potential investments.

Risk assessment for CA technologies The main objective of this section is to assess the risk related to the adoption of CLCA systems (production costs, inputs costs, market, and technology). We also identify the environmental risks facing farmers and other stakeholders across the three platforms and the pathways to improved risk management. The final aim is to guide efficient interventions to improve productivity and reduce the risks faced by smallholder crop-livestock farmers under CA farming systems in the three platforms. A sequence of research activities was implemented through participatory-action approaches designed to diagnose, develop CLCA technological options, and test their effects on productivity, farm level outcomes (revenue and net income), and related economic and financial risks. The risk assessment was evaluated through cost benefit analysis tools, which are finance-related risk indicators and stability references of the proposed technologies. Further, a systematic evaluation of the major constraints and a diagnosis of the risks related to the system improvement options was undertaken during the start-up and towards the end of the project period. This was done using a set of indicators identified through focus groups meetings of the farmers and using the ADOPT software package. The intent was to understand, inform, and support the project-delivered options for the large uptake of the CLCA systems in the target communities. The results from this latter analysis indicate that farmers make technology choices and decisions about the use of their biophysical resources (land, soil, etc.) under constraints imposed by their socioeconomic attributes and on-farm resources (the importance – in terms of profitability – of livestock activity for farmers compared to cereal crop production). In addition, there are higher level factors at the local to national scales. Indeed, the focus group results reveal that the lack of information and extension services for CA, the complexity of technology, a lack of adequate financial support for farmers, and the lack of access to credit, preclude farmer investments in CA if this requires a large capital investment (seeder). Thus, there is a perceived risk by farmers because of technological uncertainty. Information about new technologies and improved financial conditions may reverse this risk perception and enhance the scope of CA adoption by farmers. Government credit and extension policies have an important role to play. In contrast to the more direct working of agriculture sector policies and financial incentives, some social and institutional factors have a more indirect influence. Nonetheless, all these factors affect the net returns, risks, and other pecuniary elements that drive the decision-making process on the adoption of a CLCA farming system. Finally, the above economic assessment (CA versus the CV system) for farm operators in the three platforms showed considerable improvements in their respective on-farm profitability and risk reduction under a CLCA farming system.

23


CONCLUSIONS Empirical findings of the economic and adoption assessments of CA in the three platforms indicate that despite the low adoption level, opportunities for achieving greater integration of crop and livestock systems under CA still exist in the CWANA region. CA is currently practiced to varying degrees in the three countries. The potential benefits, adoption, and uptake of this technology by CWANA farmers have been demonstrated, but it is, nonetheless, occurring gradually. While there may be visible benefits from CA practice in Tunisia and Algeria, farmers in Tajikistan are at the initial stages of converting to CA. More evidence is needed in Tajikistan to prove the benefits of CA. Nevertheless, the encouraging news is that, during the project years, adoption and spread of CLCA is well perceived and we expect to move forward rapidly in the dry environments of the CWANA region. Furthermore, our results highlight that CA in Tunisia has a higher return on fertilizers, labor, and machinery than does CV farming. Farmers can derive considerable benefits from adopting CA as it responds much better to improved soil fertility management which, in turn, creates higher returns to mineral fertilizer use. Decreasing mechanization can definitely be an effective incentive for smallholder farmers adopting CA. This will substantially reduce the amount of labor required in the first years of adoption (Table 7). Although CA provided a reliable and stable yield during the first years of its adoption in Tunisia, it also had positive results – it reduced production costs, which will result in higher net benefits. This result was confirmed by the CBR analysis. The CBR under CA was 1.92 which is higher than one and thus indicates that initial investments (for CA adoption) can be financially recovered over the life of the investment (assuming a minimum of 15 years in this case). In this case, although, the total revenues and CBR were still slightly higher for CV, CA has a still higher return on capital invested and is considered as a viable option for smallholder farmers in Tunisia.


24

In Algeria, CA has had positive results for smallholders in both communities. Indeed, to some extent, farmers have achieved higher yields (crops revenue) compared to conventional farming. While greater yields are an incentive for the adoption of CA, it faces some challenges in communities where farming systems keep crop residues for livestock feeding. As CA is new in the two communities and, as a result of the immediate constraints of the integrated CLCA production system, farmers in both communities often attribute a substantially higher weight to immediate costs and benefits than to those expected in the future. However, the majority of the CA benefits are only obtained in the longer term. However, there are both economic and financial reasons (CBRs) that suggest that CA might be considered a viable option for smallholder farmers in Ain Khadra and Ouled Mansour. Farmers adapt and implement CA technologies using their own understanding of the principles, their aspirations, and the possibilities for integrating it into their farming systems. The integration also depends of their actual access to knowledge, advice, and resources. The results of CBR analysis in Tajikistan show a slight financial profitability for CA, mainly for mung bean and soybean. However, such profitability needs to be confirmed in the future to be able to draw reliable conclusions. Finally, it is worth indicating that our analysis includes assessing CLCA as a package. There are several limitations that make farmers unwilling to adopt all the components of CLCA. Commonly adopted options, in addition to reduce tillage and pesticides use, and timely sowing dates, are optimized stubble grazing, increased fodder availability, and improved cropping options. Therefore, further in-depth economic evaluations of CA technology packages with longer time horizons are still needed.

Activity 1.1.4. Optimal livestock production and CA cropping systems and a trade-off analysis for different farming systems under different cost and price scenarios Trade-offs associated with crop-livestock systems: an economic assessment The fundamental objective of this project is to determine the optimal livestock production and CA cropping systems for the different farming systems. Given this objective, a synthesis of the trade-offs associated with the different options proposed by the CLCA project and the economic costs and benefits associated with these options are presented in this section.

Tunisian platform For Tunisia, a model was developed for optimizing the allocations in terms of area and the number of head of livestock by farm, according to the gross margins of both crop and livestock activities and the balance sheet in fodder units. The model was applied, first for a farm under CV and, in a second step, for a farm under CA. The methodological framework used was to run the basic model with an objective function of maximizing the total gross margin for both crops and livestock under a set of constraints, such as land, labor, feed, and availability of other resources. The size of the average farm considered was 30 ha, with a labor availability of 550 days. For the average farm type, farming under CV practices allows the farmer to generate a total gross margin equivalent to TND 23,836 (TND 8,229 derived from crop production and TND 15,606 from livestock activities). To achieve this result, the model does not include wheat production because of the low marginal returns associated with the wheat activity. If one hectare of land is allocated to the wheat crop, the net revenue will be reduced by about TND 183. The rejection of the wheat practice by the optimization model results from the higher production cost compared to other crops. A further reason for this choice is that wheat is contributing little to animal feed. Under CA, the total gross margin recorded is about TND 22,809.

25


Of this, TND 16,759 is generated from the livestock activities and TND 6,050 comes from cereals. Empirical findings indicate that the profitability of the cereals under CA increased compared to their profitability under conventional farming as the result of mechanization. Accordingly, the same findings and trends were observed for wheat under CA. The optimization model suggests avoiding wheat cultivation under CA because of its negative marginal return (TND 354 for each hectare included in the crop rotation). Although keeping livestock is more advantageous, it is important to indicate that the profitability of this activity depends on the allocation of the residues of crops – barley straw, oats, and a fallow – to livestock feeding. More than the complementarities of the two activities from an economic point of view, it is important to highlight their dependence on the environmental plan. Complementarities between animals and crops are obvious and the model shows that if 100% of the crop residues are used as livestock feed, there is a significant profit. But this profit is transient and degenerates over time as a result of the environmental cost. Applying CA technology will mitigate the loss caused by the conventional practices. Under CA, livestock remains the key product in this type of farming system in spite of the competition for the residues. The optimal numbers of livestock that could be allowed are 64 sheep and 4 cattle. In the model, it was assumed that half of the output of barley (grain) and oats (hay) will be used for feeding livestock. Only 70% of the stubble is removed by the livestock, with the remaining 30% being used as a mulch to ensure soil cover. These findings support the integration between crops and livestock under CA with crop rotation. By introducing one additional hectare of vetch as a summer crop under CA, the farmer would gain an additional gross margin of about TND 1,200. This would raise the gross margin for the livestock activity from TND 16,520 to TND 17,841.

Algerian platform The first option analyzed was weed control management for wheat and barley (for different sowing dates) under CV and CA. An economic evaluation of the use of herbicides in CA was conducted in Ain Khadra and Ouled Mansour. The results indicated that use of a total weed control (glyphosate) and a post-emergence weed control gives the highest net income, regardless of the crop or the community. In Ouled Mansour, the net income from durum wheat obtained using the two herbicides was DZD 292,864. A gain of DZD 203,948 is obtained when the wheat fields are not treated for weeds. When a single weed treatment is used the gain is DZD 112,879. The net income from barley achieved using the two herbicides is DZD 192,123. This represents an economic gain of DZD 118,198 compared to the income from the non-weeded barley and a gain of DZD 5,555 compared to that from the use of a single application of herbicide. The second technology promoted by the project was crop rotation options as it is clear that mono-cropping implies a large loss in biodiversity and sustainability in the long term. The assessment of the economic viability of rotations practiced in Ain Khadra, M’sila Province, under CA farming revealed the profitability of all the three rotations tested. However, the highest net income of DZD 223,508 was obtained with monocropping (barley/barley). This was DZD 6062 higher than the net income from the rotation barley/pea-barley and DZD 25,612 higher than that from the rotation barley/pea-triticale. The third technological option, early sowing date, revealed the impact of this option on yield (production) and farmer income. Experimental trials conducted by Institut Technique des Grandes Cultures (ITGC) indicate that each day’s delay in sowing cereals causes a yield loss of about 0.7 t/ha (ITGC report, 2002). Two sowing dates have been assessed (10 November 2014 and 17 December 2014). Empirical findings indicate that sowing in November is more profitable than sowing in December with a net income of DZD 309,600/ha (a gain of up to DZD 61,185/ha). The CBR is 4.9 for the November sowing and 4 when the farmer sows in December. It should be emphasized that charges per hectare for the December sowing are lower than those in November by about 2% (Table 11).

26


Table 11. Economic evaluation: wheat sowing dates under CA in Algeria ITEMS

10 NOVEMBER 2014 SOWING DATE

17 DECEMBER 2014 SOWING DATE

Input cost (DZD)

Labor cost (DZD)

Operation costs (DZD)

Input cost (DZD)

Labor cost (DZD)


Sowing

6,423.30

2,000.00

8,423.30

6,423.30

2,000.00

8,423.30

Weed control

8,542.20

1,200.00

9,742.20

8,542.20

1,200.00

9,742.20

Fertilizer

10,041.10

600.00

10,641.10

10,041.10

600.00

10,641.10

Irrigation

8,184.40

11,000.00

19,184.40

8,184.40

11,000.00

19,184.40

Harvesting

219.20

13,400.00

13,619.20

219.20

11,900.00

12,119.20

Transportation

191.80

800.00

991.80

191.80

800.00

991.80

Total costs

33,602.00

29,000.00

62,602.00

33,602.00

27,500.00

61,102.00

Revenue

Quantity

Price unit

Total

Quantity

Price unit

Total

Grain (t/ha)

4.838

45,000

217,710

3.707

45,000

166,815

Number of straw bale

208

450

93,600

178

450

80,100

Total revenue

309,600.00

246,915.00

Net return

246,998.00

185,813.00


-25%

Change in total costs (%)

-2%


12.5

Cost-benefit ratio

4.9

4.0

Source: CLCA project elaboration (2015). DZD 1000 = USD 9.097

The fourth tested option consisted of analyzing the economic evaluation of two stubble grazing levels (10% and 50% of the initial stubble biomass) in order to assess the optimal grazing level option. Empirical findings indicate that net income from the 50% grazing level is higher than that from the 10% grazing level, generating a gain of around DZD 48,972/ha (22%). The CBR indicator is estimated at 9.8 for the 50% grazing level as against 8 for the 10% one (Table 12). Table 12. Economic evaluation of grazing intensity under CA in Algeria GRAZING (10%)

GRAZING (50%)

Input cost (DZD)

Labor cost (DZD)


Input cost (DZD)

Labor cost (DZD)


Sowing

2,923.3

2,000

4,923.3

2,923.3

2,000

4,923.3

Weed control

4,694.4

1,200

5,894.4

4,694.4

1,200

5,894.4

Fertilization

10,041.1

600

10,641.1

10,041.1

600

10,641.1

Harvest

219.2

9,800

10,019.2

219.2

8,600

8,819.2

Transport

191.8

800

991.8

191.8

800

991.8

18,069.8

14,400

32,469.8

18,069.8

13,200

31,269.8

Total costs

27


GRAZING (10%) Revenue Grain (t/ha) Number of straw bales

Quantity

Price unit

Total

Quantity

Price unit

Total

1.721

28,000

48,188

3.47

28,000

97,160

112

450

50,400

136

450

61,200

Crops revenue Livestock revenue

GRAZING (50%)

98,588 4

Total revenue Net return

40,000

158,360

160,000

4

258,588

306,360

226,118.2

275,090.2


22%

Change in total costs (%)

-4%


5.5

Cost-benefit ratio

37000

8.0

Source: CLCA project elaboration (2015). DZD 1000 = USD 9.097 Note: price of a sheep weighing 55 kg was around DZD 40,000.

9.8

148,000


Box 1. Conservation agriculture and farm sustainability in Tunisia An assessment of the sustainability of conservation agriculture (CA) compared to conventional agriculture (CV) using the IDEA (Indicateurs de Durabilité des Exploitations Agricoles) methodology and a set of economic, social, and environmental indicators at the farm level in Tunisia, revealed the importance of CA in terms of enhancing farm sustainability. CA farms are managed in a more sustainable way compared to CV ones. The economic range appears to be more extended within the illustration for both CV and CA systems. Social sustainability for conventional systems shrunk in contrast to that for CA systems. The environmental scale is higher for CA systems in comparison with CV ones, but still remains the lowest of the three durability scales. Conventional agriculture


100

Limiting value of the durability

80 60 40 20 0 Economic durability

Environmental durability

Social durability

The IDEA method considers that these three scales are not cumulative and the actual level of sustainability of the system studied is limited by the lowest of the three values. For CV farms, the overall sustainability is limited by social sustainability, which takes an economic value of 26. For CA farms, global sustainability is limited by the environmental value with a score of 63. In the ecological dimension, CA scored higher in indicators related to crop and animal diversification than CV practices, which resulted in the higher overall sustainability value.

Conventional agriculture Conservation agriculture

28

29


Activity 1.1.5. Monitoring the adoption of CA technologies and identification of the constraints to and determinants of adoption Despite the perceived benefits (agronomic and economic performances) of integrating livestock and cropping under CA in the three platforms, it is still early to talk about adoption of this complex croplivestock system. The reason is that national teams are still working on the adaptation of the CLCA package to the structural specificities (small size of agricultural holdings, farm land division to small plots, crop/livestock integration production system, low mechanization level, low agricultural inputs, and poorly organized farmers) to the different contexts. Easy access to a low-cost, no-till seeder, especially by smallholders, is also a serious constraint that farmers are facing in the CWANA region.

Tunisian platform Degree of awareness of CA Tunisian farmers were asked to classify soil quality and erosion based on an intensity scale (low, medium, and high). Based on the household baseline survey results, it was shown that a small number of farmers are located in less favorable areas with specific difficulties that limit CA adoption. Different proportions of the farmers indicated that soil erosion levels caused by water (45%) and wind (10%) were high in their region. It is interesting to note that, for these farmers, land degradation is also a motivation for the adoption of CA. However, the farmers’ willingness to adopt CA techniques is mainly motivated by economic incentives. About 40% of farmers believe that premiums of TND 100 (per ha) would be sufficient to motivate their conversion. The farmers’ willingness to keep the straw on the soil is also conditioned by financial motives. Further results suggest that 51% of farmers require subsidies of between TND 50 and 250 per ha to retain crop residues. Constraints and barriers to converting to CA farming An indication of the apparent limitations to adopting CA technology is the number of farmers who are producing under CA technique – just 8% of the total sample. Of these, 40% had adopted it before 2005. The low proportion of adoption of CA reinforces the conclusion that economic issues are the main factors preventing the conversion of farmers. Although adopters and non-adopters have different motivations, they both believe CA farming requires more control, in addition to higher financial assets and technical training. More than 70% of farmers pointed out the high costs of CA farming, especially during the long


30

conversion periods when benefits from the CA are not yet perceived. Small-scale farmers consider the availability of machinery (seeder) and lack of financial resources as major constraints to converting to new farming techniques. Additionally, more than 60% of farmers consider that the difficulties in getting access to information on CA practices are preventing them from converting to the new technology. Analysis of the results from the qualitative analysis using the ADOPT software for the Tunisian platform farmers predicts a peak adoption rate for CA technology of 95% after a period of 15.7 years. The forecast growth in use is around 40.9% after 5 years and 88.9% after 10 years.

Algerian platform Degree of awareness of CA Only 14% of the farmers surveyed have had some experience with CA; the experience ranged from 1 year to 8 years. Experience with direct seeding was obtained for the first time, in most cases (80%) from ITGC, by following the neighboring farmers (15%), from the Association Trait d’Union (3.4%), and from the dealers of agricultural machinery (1%). The majority of farmers practicing direct seeding were using the ITGC seeders (83%). Direct seeding is practiced mainly (71.4%) on straw. It is also practiced on green vegetation (14%) or uncovered soil (14%). About 77% of farmers are satisfied with their experience regarding direct seeding, while 15.4% are moderately satisfied and only 7.7% are not satisfied. However, around 95% of farmers are willing to continue with this experience of direct seeding and also to modify their seeders to cope with this new technology. This will be for their own use or for service delivery. Constraints and barriers to converting to CA farming •

The price of the no-till seeder is a strong constraint for 85% of farmers

•

The need to acquire a powerful tractor is a strong constraint for 85% of farmers

•

Excessive rental cost of the drill is a strong constraint for 78% of farmers and is classified as the first most important constraint for 57% of farmers

•

Integration (competition) with sheep farming is a strong constraint for 84% of farmers and is classified as the second most important constraint for 28.6% of farmers

•

The non-availability of a rental service for the seed drill is a strong constraint for 85% of farmers and is classified as the third most important constraint for 40% of farmers

•

Cost of weeding is a strong constraint for 60% of farmers

•

The lack of specific extension service is a strong constraint for 58% of farmers

•

Illegal grazing is a strong constraint for 45.5% of farmers.

31


Factors affecting the adoption of CA The results of the focus groups in the two communities indicate that in Ain Khadra predictions for the peak adoption level for CA technologies is 83% after a period of 25 years. After 5 years, the predicted adoption level will be around 14.1% and the adoption level is expected to be 51.7% after 10 years. However, In Ouled Mansour community, the predicted adoption level for CA is expected to be 89% after 20 years. Predictions for the adoption level are 24.6% after 5 years and 71.8% after 10 years. The step change in the peak adoption level and the time to achieve this in Ouled Mansour farmers were subjected to a sensitivity analysis. This revealed that the major enterprises that could benefit from the innovation, the profitability of the farm business, and the net exposure of the farm business to risk are affecting the peak level of adoption of CA for the farmers of this community. However, under conditions of severe short-term financial constraints, being able to trial the technology (or significant components of it) would help determine the time to peak adoption. Other factors in determining the time to peak adoption include: •

The complexity of the innovation

•

Being able to easily evaluate it when it is used

•

The development of substantial new skills and knowledge by farmers to use the innovation

•

The size of the up-front cost of the investment relative to its potential annual benefit.

The comparison of the results for the two communities indicates that farmers in Ouled Mansour are predisposed to adopt CA faster than those in Ain Khadra.

Tajikistan platform Degree of awareness of CA With respect to their experience in CA, the farmers in Tajikistan who were surveyed were quite homogeneous as 90% had had no experience with CA and only a few had a little understanding of its practices. Some elements of CA have been implemented in several donor-funded projects in the past, but their geographic coverage and number of beneficiaries (mostly farmers) were relatively small. In order to create awareness of CA in the target sites in Tajikistan, three training courses were organized for researchers and farmers. Constraints and barriers to converting to CA farming One important barrier to adopting CA is the mind-set of the farmers; it is necessary to overcome the culture of the plow. Farmers and even researchers often stated, “Under our conditions, a change to CA technologies is not necessary. The density of our soil is too high so we cannot grow crops without tillage.” Also, there is competition for crop residues. Smallholder farmers generally manage mixed crop/livestock systems where crop residues are used as animal feed. CA may require more investment in purchased inputs, especially in the first years. Weed control is a major factor in the early years of CA and herbicide use will be also a constraint to adopting CA.


Box 2. Adoption of CA and its determinants in CWANA The project conducted a comprehensive assessment of CA adoption in the three countries. This revealed some common results about the major drivers for and constraints to adoption of CA practices. The main determinants of and constraints to adoption include: • • • • • • • •

Small farm size Lack of information and extension services on CA The importance (in terms of profitability) of the livestock activity for farmers compared to cereal crop production Lower production risk of livestock than cropping activities Alternative feeding solutions to compensate for stubble retention Size of the up-front cost of the investment (seeder) Lack of financial support available to farmers Complexity of the technology.

Predicted years to peak adoption

Predicted peak level of adoption (%)

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10

Ain Khadra

0 Tunisia

Ouled Mansour Algeria

Tajikistan

Predicted level of CA adoption for the three countries

Activity 1.1.6. Gendered limitations and advantages that will promote adoption of CA and determine if CA will increase the labor burden of women A survey and direct interviews with men and women were conducted to identify any gendered limitations and advantages that could promote adoption of CA and determine if CA will increase the labor burden of women. The outcome of this exercise was different in the three platforms and can be summarized as follows:

Tunisian platform Four types of family pattern have been analyzed for the Tunisian case. These four configurations (complementary model, collaborative model, unipersonal model, and the individualized model) were built on two central criteria – the distribution of tasks and activities, and the responsibilities and capacity of decision-making. Empirical findings indicate that women participate in all agricultural activities. More than 70% of the farmers surveyed indicated that the contribution of women to agricultural activities is 50% or more. Such a rate is important in encouraging farmers to adopt CLCA farming systems. Despite the role of women as an important rural workforce, men generally have almost all the decision-making power as the owners of the production factors. The results suggest that in only 20% of the farms sampled was the role of women considered fundamental. Although the collaborative model, in which activities are not clearly

32

33


divided between men and women, is the most common model on the farms surveyed, women continue to be responsible for the main household tasks. Without a reallocation of the gender-division of these roles within the new CA framework, this may lead to an unacceptable increase in the burden of labor on both men and women.

Algerian platform In Algeria, rural women play a significant role in economic and social development. There are some difficulties in identifying their actual contribution as it is difficult to hold focus groups with women (cultural and social issues). The seasonal calendar of the women living in the area of the project shows that CA will not increase the activities of women and their labor burden.

Tajikistan platform There are very few female-headed farms in Tajikistan. The low representation of females is the result of conservative, traditional views about the appropriate roles for males and females in society. Empirical findings reveal that 50% of the farmers surveyed are involved in occasional and seasonal employment in the cities. The high unemployment rates lead the male population to migrate for work while woman remain at home to take care of all farming activities in addition to the household needs. (Women working part-time get paid either in agricultural products or receive a monthly salary in cash). Preliminary findings show no clear impact on how CA can increase the labor burden of women in Tajikistan.


34

OUTPUT 1.2. Enhanced crop-livestock

integration in CA through optimized stubble grazing strategies and increased fodder availability from forages or fodder shrubs A core component of the project is the development of enhanced croplivestock integration in CA through optimized stubble grazing strategies and increased fodder availability from forages or fodder shrubs. In Algeria and Tunisia, smallholders dominate both crop production and livestock systems. Most of the poor residing in rural areas raise livestock – 70% of smallholders in Tunisia and 78% in Algeria. Within this context, it is resource-poor and vulnerable smallholder farming systems that will have the greatest challenges adopting the retention of crop residues strategy because of the strong competition for residues by livestock and for other uses. This may increase yield losses rather than gains (Pittelkow et al., 2015; available at http://www. nature.com/nature/journal/v517/n7534/abs/nature13809.html). It is essential to point out that such an integration, which requires systemslevel-thinking, was a major challenge to achieve and to quantify within the time frame of the project. It is anticipated that at the end of the 3-year period the project will attempt to address the trade-offs and synergies associated with the crop-livestock integrated systems under CA. The process needs data and results for more than a single cropping season. As the application and testing of the CA technical packages was first introduced to Tajikistan by the project, it was decided not to implement grazing experiments there, but, instead, focus on introducing and adapting practices. Therefore, data on grazing experiments are reported only for Algeria and Tunisia. Enhancing crop-livestock integration under CA by optimizing stubble grazing strategies and increasing fodder availability from forages or fodder shrubs was achieved in both Algeria and Tunisia to a reasonable extent (between 75 and 100% of the planned outputs were achieved; see Table 13). There were a range of setbacks, primarily in establishing fodder shrubs in alleyfarming systems that were largely out of the control of the project teams. In a number of cases, unseasonably cold, frosty conditions and damage caused by an infestation of slugs (this were later treated) resulted in an unexpectedly high level of seedling mortality of Opuntia ficus-indica (cactus) and Medicago arborea. In some instances, uncontrolled grazing on the farmers’ demonstration sites resulted in less than optimal establishment. In the Algerian situation, where it has been possible to better manage livestock grazing, satisfactory shrub establishment is expected within a 2- to 3-year time frame and the effects on natural resources (erosion and soil water reserves) can then be assessed.

35


Table 13. Level of completion of activities under Output 1.2 ACHIEVEMENTS Outputs 1.2. Enhanced crop-livestock integration in CA through optimized stubble grazing strategies and increased fodder availability from forages or fodder shrubs •

-

A stubble management tool was developed in Tunisia after Year 1. This was further refined after Year 2 and awaits validation in the post-project period of on-station and onfarm trials (summer grazing of 2016). Also, in order to evaluate and to complete the model with regard to meeting the ewe’s nutritional requirements, intake measurements were carried out on station (Achieved 90%)

-

An on-farm grazing tool was developed in Algeria using the data from all on-farm trials in M’Sila. This awaits validation in the post-project trials (summer grazing of 2016) (Achieved 90%)

-

First estimates were obtained in Tunisia by 18 months, and then confirmed in Tunisia and Algeria by month 24 (Achieved 75%)

-

In addition to Sétif, the number of on-farm trials in Algeria reached 27 in Year 3 (90%), 18 in Tunisia, and 10 in Tajikistan (Global level of achievement ≈ 100%)

-

Meeting the ewes’ nutritional requirement was assessed by monitoring nutrition-borne blood metabolites in Tunisia and Algeria, body condition score, and changes in live weight. (Achieved 100%)

-

For low and medium rainfall areas in each target country, potential forage crops (forage pea and vetch) were grown separately or in association with shrubs in a demonstration of the alley cropping system. (Achieved 100%)

First report on grazing strategy available by month 12, and validated by months 24 and 36 (Year 2 and Year 3 reports)

Activities 1.2.1. In the on-station (Years 1 and 2 at Sétif) and the 30 on-farm stubble grazing experiments (multi-year, 15 initiated in Year 2 and an additional 15 initiated in Year 3), crop residue off-take through different grazing strategies will be measured •

Grazing strategies presenting different levels of residue retention, and proportions of energy and protein intake by grazing sheep described. First estimates by month 18

•

Trade-off between biomass intake (lost residue retention) and direct manuring assessed by month 30

•

On-station experiments at Sétif, Algeria and in Tajikistan (if possible). At least 15 multi-year on-farm trials initiated in Years 2 and 3

1.2.2. Grazing strategies will be evaluated with regard to meeting the ewes’ nutritional requirements •

Fast growing and high nutritive value fodder species identified for alley cropping by month 24 and confirmed by month 36


ACHIEVEMENTS Outputs 1.2.3. The effect of nutrient recycling (urine and fecal excretion) on soil fertility will be assessed considering the differences between daytime grazing only and day and night time grazing •

Forage crops and suitable crop establishment options identified in the first crop season and validated both on-station and on-farm after the second

1.2.4. Fast growing high biomass and quality fodder-shrub species will be tested onstation and on-farm for compatibility with annual crops. Already identified germplasm will be grown in Year 1

-

Under laboratory conditions, urine and fecal excretion amounts (eight sheep for four weeks) were evaluated and converted to a carbon and nitrogen basis to estimate nutrient inputs coming from a sheep flock grazing vetch. No such observations were carried out on-farm (Achieved 50%)

-

Forage legumes and cereals were tested under CA conditions for their productivity in a crop rotation (Achieved 100%)

-

Different shrub species were tested in all three countries and the best species were identified. Data related to shrub establishment, vigor, and growth have been collected and analyzed (Achieved 100%)

-

Biomass and animal performance data is being collected in Algeria and will be analyzed after completion of data collection and a laboratory analysis following the 2016 summer grazing trials (Achieved 50%)

Plant cover (establishment, vigor, and growth over time) of crop and fodder resources will be monitored under CA in conjunction with Output 1.3 •

Alley-cropping technology has been adopted to improve integrated crop-livestock feeding options and evaluated on at least three sites in Algeria and will be integrated into Activity 1.3.3

1.2.5. Appropriate feeding strategies will be developed for using shrub species in fodder to improve livestock productivity •

Particulate organic matter and soil water infiltration capacity increased in response to improved grazing management

METHODS To achieve the objectives of this component, on-station (Khebaba farm in Algeria and Bourebiaa research station in Tunisia) and on-farm (M’Sila site in Algeria and Chouarnia site in Tunisia) trials were designed and implemented during the course of the project. In accordance with the project proposal, grazing strategies were first developed on-station and then the most promising were implemented on-farm. Based on the results obtained from the on-station experiments and from the ex ante survey, the project worked with a smaller group of farmers (10 to 15) to optimize stubble grazing practices at the target sites. The trials were then expanded in Year 3.

MAIN RESULTS Effect of stocking rate on lamb growth Regardless of the stocking rate – 15 or 30 lambs/ha – lambs grazing wheat stubbles for one and a half months after harvest without any supplements were able to meet their maintenance requirements and even to grow at 30 g/day. Apparently the higher stocking rate did not result in competition among the lambs for stubble biomass as the two animal groups showed similar live weight changes.

36

37


Interaction between stocking rate and agricultural practice For the same number of grazing animals per hectare as above, and a grazing period of two months using ewes in early pregnancy, the different agricultural practice (CV and CA) did not affect the available initial biomass over two consecutive cropping seasons. Such differences may occur when CA is practiced over a long period of time on the same land base, hence improving biomass quality and quantity. After three years in Tunisia, there was a trend at the first sampling time prior to grazing for stubble biomass to be higher for CA (P < 0.05, 981.9 kg dry matter/ha for CV and 1311.6 kg dry matter/ha for CA). This is among the tradeoffs that could not be investigated in depth during the relatively short life-span of the project. Fortunately, more data will be available with the engagement of NARES in Tunisia and Algeria to at least maintain the long-term, on-station trials. Regardless of the stocking rate, after a grazing period of two months, stubble biomass decrease was not affected by the agricultural practice. However, there was a highly significant decrease over time. For CV, initial biomass estimates ranged between 1407 and 1485 kg dry matter/ha and fell to 257 kg dry matter/ ha by the end of the experiment, with no effect of stocking rate. Very similar trends were observed for CA. The initial biomass ranged between 1340.8 and 1343.1 kg dry matter/ha and dropped to statistically similar figures of 183.9 kg dry matter/ha after 60 days for a stocking rate of 15 and 204.9 kg dry matter/ha for a stocking rate of 30. The rate of stubble biomass off take was approximately 85%. Neither agricultural practice nor stocking rate affected changes in the live weight and body condition score of the ewes even though they were at a demanding physiological stage (early mid-pregnancy). (It is during this period when a nutritional deficiency may jeopardize fetal organ differentiation and development.) The values for blood-borne nutritional metabolites were in the range of concentrations generally observed in sheep and did not fall below the physiological thresholds for the species. This is further support that under the trial conditions the ewes were in satisfactory nutritional condition and their major nutritional requirements were being met. Stubble biomass without any supplementation during the first 30 days of grazing or with a moderate supplementation (250 g of concentrate/head/day) if grazing is extended for another month, satisfied the nutrient requirements of both Ouled Jellal ewes in Algeria and Barbarine ewes in Tunisia.

Monitoring stubble grazing and biomass retention In Algeria, one of the most important objectives was to establish an optimal stubble grazing height for livestock integrated into CA systems. The initial goal was to assess three different stubble management strategies (retain 100, 50 and 10% of the initial stubble biomass). It was intended to observe the disappearance of stubble and remove animals based on the stubble biomass left on the ground. However, this method proved to be difficult for the technicians. An attempt was made to achieve the 50 and 10% remaining levels by controlling the duration of daily grazing (3 hour vs. 6 hour) of the ewes. Unfortunately, this method also did not work and it was not possible to achieve the intended proportions. At the end of the grazing period, the remaining stubble biomass was around 25% of the initial biomass in both treatments with no effects on changes in the live weight of the sheep. This was also the case in the Tunisian trial, where, regardless of the stocking rate (15 and 30 ewes/ha), the final stubble biomass was the same for both treatments. Again these findings raise the question of grazing behavior. In the case of Algeria, whether the animals spend 3 hour or 6 hour grazing under the same conditions, no differences were found in the remaining stubble biomass. The results from Tunisia and Algeria on stubble grazing by sheep have important management implications for crop-livestock farmers. The best management recommendation from these initial findings is that stubble height or amount does not depend on stocking rates or grazing time. The most practical approach for a farmer would be to observe the disappearance of the stubble and remove the animals from the grazing area when the desired biomass of stubble is achieved. A very simple quadrat measurement method, which could be handled by the farmer, can help set the length of


the grazing period to leave sufficient stubble biomass consistent with the CA package. A more rigorous and scientifically sound approach is to use image processing software, in this case ‛VegMeasure’. Random images are taken 1.5 m above the ground with a regular digital camera (Figure 4). This technique offers quantitative data which are unbiased (no human interpretation) and provides a quick and cost-efficient way to estimate stubble cover. Interestingly, it is very easy to build regression equations linking VegMeasure data to biomass estimates. Such mathematical relationships already exist for single crops (wheat and barley) and even for more complex pasture conditions. Figure 4. Residual stubble in Algerian fields: original image (left) and VegMeasure processed image (right)

Stubble management tool On the basis of results from on-station trials in Tunisia during 2014 and 2015, a linear mathematical relationship was developed between the residual biomass and grazing duration for both CV and CA conditions. It was determined for a fixed stocking rate of 30 ewes/ha (Figure 5 and Figure 6). The model shows high determination coefficients (0.8 Figure 5 and 0.73 Figure 6) and allows the residual biomass to be predicted after any grazing time. This represents an important tool for stubble gazing management since it is possible to decide the length of the grazing time according to the biomass needed for soil and plant requirements and for a mulch effect under CA conditions. In connection with this, a model of grazing consisting of a stocking rate of 30 ewes/ha for 30 days is proposed. This model was tested in the on-farm trial (Siliana) with Noire de Thibar ewes grazing on durum wheat stubble produced under CA conditions. After 30 days of grazing, a residual biomass of about 34% was found. This value is close to what was yielded by calculation using the model (39%). It was also possible to develop a grazing tool using the on-farm trials from M’Sila in Algeria (Figure 7). This grazing tool capitalizes on the data from 17 wheat and barley stubble grazing trials under CA relating the number of grazing days to the flock size. It ensures that the residual biomass is at least 0.6 t/ ha – representing 20 to 25% of the initial biomass. Empirical data from other environments and personal communications support that, under semi-arid conditions, such levels of residual biomass could serve as a mulch for CA. Under the conditions experienced in Algeria it can account for the fraction which can be blown by the summer winds. The tool also shows the average body condition score of the flock at the end of the grazing period. The significance of monitoring body condition score in this model increases when the grazing period exceeds 20 days. It could serve as a warning signal to readjust the diet by introducing a supplementary feed. To be optimized, these grazing tools need to be provided with more data. They also require full cooperation between animal, soil, and crop scientists. There are few recommendations available in the literature on how much biomass should be kept on the soil, particularly for semi-arid conditions. For example, Köller (2003)1 claimed that livestock could be fully integrated into CA, when more than 30% of the residues from the previous crop are left on the ground as mulch. Also, the study of Masmoudi (2012)2 showed that the integration of livestock at different stocking rates requires a rate of biomass cover higher than 78% before grazing. However, this depends on the yield, and such rates may not be applicable in dry years. 1 Köller K. 2003.Conservation tillage – technical, ecological and economic aspects. Pages 34–9 in Conservation Tillage and Direct Seeding Workshop. Izmir. 2 Masmoudi A (2012). Etude de certains paramètres de durabilité des systèmes de production céréaliculture élevage dans le contexte de l’intégration des techniques de l’agriculture de conservation. Sétif, 51.

38

39


Figure 5. Relationship between biomass and grazing period under CV

Figure 6. Relationship between biomass and grazing period under CA

Figure 7. Relationship between stocking density and number of grazing days when ensuring a residual biomass of at least 0.6 t/ha in on-farm stubble grazing trials under CA (M’Sila, Algeria)


40

Box 3: Optimizing on-farm stubble grazing: scalable model in M’Sila-Sétif and Siliana NO-TILL AND KEEPING SHEEP IN THE SYSTEM •

Residual wheat or barley stubbles: ≈ 0.6 to 1 t/ha

•

Lambs in post-weaning stage (growing at 30-70 g/day) – ewes during mating, mid pregnancy (slightly increasing weight – maintaining constant body condition score)

•

Daily grazing time 6-8 hour

•

Stocking rate up to 30 head/ha

•

Number of grazing days 30-45, but pull out animals if residual biomass is near 0.6 t/ha

•

If grazing lasts beyond 45 days and stubble biomass is not limiting, introduce a moderate supplement of from 250 to 300 g concentrate/head/day

Alternative CA-based summer feed: vetch grazing Among the three principles of CA, crop rotation is also very relevant for livestock integration. In mixed production systems, forage legumes can be included in the crop rotation. Forage legumes, such as vetch, offer many options to producers. It can be grazed while green in spring, it can be cut as hay and used as feed later in the season, and, finally it can be allowed to reach maturity in the field and grazed during the summer as an alternative to cereal stubbles. This latter option would represent an interesting alternative to preserving stubble under CA practices. In Tunisia, for instance, this last option of summer grazing of dry vetch coincides with post-weaning and early lamb fattening, when the lambs’ nutritional requirements are high. It also coincides with the ewes being turned out for mating and it may provide an interesting option to flush the ewes (http://www.icarda.org/drywire/issue-3.html#a2). In an initial grazing trial, a total of 30 weaned Barbarine lambs aged seven months were used. The lambs were allocated to three homogeneous groups balanced for live weight and assigned to one of the following feeding regimes during 47 days between 30 June and 16 August: R1: vetch grazing during morning (3 hour) and evening (2 hour) R2: barley stubble grazing during morning (3 hour) and evening (2 hour) + 400 g barley grain/head/day R3: oat hay ad libitum + 600 g commercial concentrate/head/day Animals in the R1 and R2 groups were grazed at a stocking rate of 20 lambs/ha based on initial biomass yield and a hypothetical mean individual daily intake of 1 kg dry matter/lamb. The R3 treatment represents a common practice of lamb fattening during the summer period with diets based on hay and concentrate (feedlot system). Initial vetch biomass averaged 4.5 t dry matter/ha and dropped to 2.5 t dry matter/ha by the end of the grazing period. During the same period, barley stubble biomass decreased from approximately 4 t dry matter/ha to less than 2.3 t dry matter/ha. Average daily gains were 64 ± 23.06 g for the R1 lambs, 60 ±

41


4.54 g for the R2 lambs, and 168 ± 69.92 g for the R3 lambs. On the basis of a 50-day grazing period, economic analysis clearly shows that the cost per kg live weight produced is much lower when grazing vetch (TND 1.9/kg for R2 lambs, TND 3.3/kg for R1 lambs, and TND3 3.9/kg gain for the R3 group). The most important practical information arising from this work is that vetch replaced fallows and its grazing yielded very similar animal performance as grazing wheat stubble plus a substantial grain supplement. Alternate grazing of vetch in the morning and wheat stubble in the afternoon is another option that was tested against full grazing of vetch or full grazing of wheat stubble supplemented with a commercial concentrate. The idea here is to use the wheat stubble only partially in order to keep sufficient stubble biomass in accordance with the practice of CA and to improve animal performance (growth rate here) through vetch grazing. The rate of biomass disappearance for both vetch and wheat stubble grazed once or twice a day is presented in Figure 8. Average daily growth rates were similar for both groups receiving vetch-based diets and were higher than for animals grazing wheat residues (vetch grazing only 145 g/day, vetch-wheat residues wheat residues 138 g/day, and 66 g/day during a 65-days grazing period). Figure 8. Biomass yield variation (dry matter/ha) during grazing for both wheat stubble and vetch paddocks when grazed once or twice per day

TND 10 = USD 4.6625

3


42

Box 4. Stubble grazing of vetch and wheat residues under CA enhances soil organic matter content Vetch paddock

Wheat stubble paddock

Total Organic matter (t/ha)

110 105 100 95 90 85 80

Mulch (not grazed)

Grazing one time a day (R2)

Grazing two timse a day (R1)

Performance of forage legumes and cereal monocultures and mixture under CA The introduction of sown oat-vetch crops, for the purpose of providing fodder for livestock, and replacing weed fallows in Algeria and Tunisia has produced extremely encouraging results. The further development of this system, and, in particular, increased monitoring and analysis of the benefits to livestock production, subsequent crops, and overall farm profitability is strongly recommended, in addition to exploring opportunities with other fodder crops, such as alfalfa. Further to this, exploring alternative grazing systems, including ‘cut and carry’ fodder conservation and the integration of small-scale feedlot activities on-farm, may well offer opportunities for developing a truly integrated CLCA system with positive economic benefits for small-scale farmers. Annual forage legumes and cereals are often cultivated under rainfed conditions in dry areas. However, their potential production has not been tested under a CA system in the CWANA region. Results from Tajikistan indicated that dry matter yield was not affected by tillage (P = 0.14), but there was a significant difference (P < 0.001) among the forage crops in their dry matter production. Maximum forage yields (9028 kg/ha) were obtained from triticale + vetch under no-till seeding (Figure 9). The lowest forage yield (3570 kg/ ha) was obtained from forage pea in under conventional tillage. Triticale had the lowest forage yield under no-till compared to conventional tillage. In all other treatments no-till resulted in higher yields compared to conventional tillage. In the rainfed cereal-legume based systems of the Gissar Valley, no-till proved to be more profitable, resource saving, and energy saving.

43


Figure 9. Forage yield of legume-cereal mixtures under no-till and conventional tillage Forage pea

Triticale

Triticale+forage pea

Triticale+Vetch

Vetch

10000

Yield (kg/ha)

9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 CT

No-till

Alley-cropping system under CA Alley cropping is used strategically to improve forage production, mitigate drought, serve as a windbreak, capture windblown sediments in dry areas, and reduce the need for fertilizer. It is an important practice in cultivated areas as it provides many benefits, such as fodder for livestock, and offers long-term stability to soils. To test the potential of forage crops within and without alley cropping under direct tillage and conventional tillage, a split plot design trial was conducted in the Fall of 2014 at the project demonstration site in Sharora village in the Gissar Valley (main plots are mulberry alleys; subplots were forage monocultures [triticale and forage pea] and mixtures of triticale + forage pea; Figure 10). The alley-cropping system and the type of forage crop were significant sources of variation in Tajikistan (P < 0.001). The highest dry matter yield was 4102 kg/ha with triticale + forage pea without mulberry alley cropping. The lowest dry matter yield of 1540 kg/ha was recorded for forage pea not in alleys. A cost benefit analysis indicated that triticale + forage pea (USD 624) not in alleys is followed by triticale (USD 504) and triticale + forage pea (USD 552) with mulberry trees. The lowest observed profit is with forage pea (USD 185) without mulberry trees. Profit is one indicator to determine the ease of adoption of any intervention under the rainfed conditions of Tajikistan.


44

Figure 10. Forage yield of legume-cereal mixtures under no-till and conventional tillage Forage pea

Triticale

Triticale+forage pea

10000

Yield (kg/ha)

9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 With mulberry

Without mulberry

Further alley cropping results were generated in Algeria. The productivity of forage crops (pea-triticale and barley) and fodder shrubs in an alley-cropping system were evaluated to develop alternative, low cost feed options (single species of forages or mixes) to improve the quantity and quality of the feed supply. This will assist farmers to optimize their livestock management under CA. An on-station trial was carried out at Sétif on 4 ha. Four crops (wheat, barley, triticale, and pea) and three different shrubs were used for alley cropping – Atriplex nummularia, Atriplex halimus, and cactus. The Atriplex halimus seedlings had the highest survival rate, while the cactus did not survive because of frost damage. Atriplex halimus had a higher dry weight, height, width, and plant cover when than Atriplex nummularia. After harvest, the plots of barley and wheat crops were grazed by 18 sheep for 15 days. The sheep were grazed on stubble (wheat and barley) and Atriplex fodder shrubs planted in an alley-cropping system. The stubble biomass was measured before and after grazing. The results showed that the grazing reduced stubble biomass by 49%. The weights of the sheep before and after grazing were measured. Live weight gain varied between 0.5 to 3 kg; the differences were mainly due to individual animal types (growing lambs, yearlings, and adult ewes). The average was 1.68 ± 0.81 kg.

45


OUTPUT 1.3. Site-specific CA technology

packages fine-tuned and disseminated for enhanced farm productivity, resource use efficiency, and profitability Activities under Component 1.3 were designed based on the site-specific conditions in each country. Since there were differences among the countries in terms of capacity, experience, and needs. The activities were planned considering not only farmers’ needs, but also the technical capability of the national counterparts. Tunisia, having had a relatively longer exposure to CA promotion and research, was selected as a location to optimize and fine-tune the nitrogen and seeding rates under CA through on-station research and demonstration activities. In Algeria, CA technology has been introduced more recently. The focus of activities conducted there was on the introduction of weed management, diversification through rotation, seeding date, and direct seeding in farmers’ fields in different communities. In Tajikistan, which has had no prior experience with CA, the fundamentals of CA were introduced through on-station experiments involving variety, tillage, and rotation trials. On-farm demonstrations involving direct seeding and double cropping were also demonstrated. All countries made significant progress on CA introduction, promotion, and research (Table 12). National counterparts from Tunisia, Algeria, and Tajikistan established more than 85 on-farm demonstrations and on-station experiments over the three years. None of the established on-station trials failed, illustrating the competence and dedication of national teams. For example, grazing was not correctly managed on Khebaba farm in Sétif during the second year of the trial as a result of a change in management and the very poor condition of the animals. However, the agronomic part of the trial, investigating the effect on soil fertility, compactness, and water infiltration was fully implemented. Only a few farmers’ demonstrations failed because of communal grazing without permission of the farmer’ fields, or the farmers failing to irrigate the crops in very dry areas. The farmers’ reception, perception, and acceptance were very positive. Many expressed interest in CA provided they could obtain zero-till (ZT) seeders. The relatively late arrival of the ZT seeders did not discourage the national teams. In Tajikistan, for instance, wheat was hand-seeded, and in Tunisia, INRAT covered the expenses for the establishment of the barley stubble grazing trial during the first year. These examples again illustrate the commitment of the national teams. An uneven playing field in terms of the experiences of the different countries with CA was a challenge to overcome, but also provided opportunity for the stakeholders to exchange


ideas and develop alternative approaches. The combination of both detailed scientific research activities and farmers’ demonstrations were successfully conducted in each country. However, for the scientific research to be disseminated, longer-term data is required. One-year’s delay in the project’s start significantly reduced the prospect of developing relevant CA packages stemming from scientific findings. Unfortunately, most of the scientific data for CA promotion being used by development and extension institutions in these countries is coming from various countries where pedoclimatic and socioeconomic conditions are markedly different. There is a need for sustained funding for long-term CLCA research in the region because the impact on natural resources (soil health, erosion, water infiltration, etc.) needs time to be assessed and may produce varying responses to treatments as time progresses.

46

47


Table 14. Level of completion of activities under Output 1.3 ACHIEVEMENTS Outputs 1.3 Site-specific CA technology packages fine-tuned and disseminated for enhanced farm productivity, resource use efficiency, and profitability. Detailed reports on CA adaptive trials available by months 12, 24, and 36 and recommendations on crop management practices available by month 30

Adaptive CA trials integrating ZT, crop rotations, weed management, nutrient management, and the integration of fodder/grain species were conducted in three countries. Number of established on-farm trials (69) far exceeded the number planned (45) (Achieved 100%)

Activities 1.3.1. Large sets of diverse germplasm for each of wheat, barley, and lentil, along with sets of triticale, oat, vetch, forage pea, and other potential fodder crops will be tested on-station in Algeria and Tajikistan. This will be done in conjunction with Output 1.2 to identify the genetic variation in crop response to CA (ZT), compared to the conventional (tillage) methods •

Suitable genotypes selected for CA trials by month 24 (two seasons)

•

One location in Tajikistan and one location at Sétif, Algeria in combination with 1.2.4

•

Crop rotations tested by month 18 (second season)

1.3.2. Selected promising lines will be analyzed for feed quality as a fodder/grain crop and validated in on-farm variety trials with participating farmers Conduct adaptive trials integrating CA technologies (ZT, crop rotations, and stubble management) with weed and nutrient management, and the integration of fodder/grain species in at least 45 on-farm trials (multi-year, 15 initiated in Year 1 and an additional 15 initiated each in Years 2 and 3). These will be spread across the three target countries (Tajikistan, Tunisia, and Algeria) Site-specific crop management recommendations ready by month 18 These activities, conducted with farmers’ groups and local farmers’ organizations, are the key vehicles for spillover to involve large numbers of farmers, hence promoting farmer-tofarmer learning and communication At least 15 new multi-year on-farm trials initiated/year and conducted across the target sites. These will integrate Activities 1.2.4 (alley/relay cropping), 1.3.1 (crops), and CA (1.3.3 tillage) Technology guidelines and extension material ready by month 24 FEAST – Feed assessment tool

In Tajikistan, efforts focused on wheat, because it was difficult to obtain large sets of germplasm for the different tested crops (Achieved 20%). In Algeria and Tunisia, it was possible to access sets of diverse germplasm for each of wheat, barley, and lentil, along with sets of triticale, oat, vetch, forage pea, and other potential fodder crops. Three locations with both on-station and on-farm trials, several crop rotations compared and reported (Achieved 100%) Selected forage species were analyzed for feed quality and the analysis of feed resource availability validated using the FEAST tool in Tunisia and Algeria (Achieved 75%) Adaptive CA trials integrating ZT, crop rotations, weed management, nutrient management, and the integration of fodder/grain species were conducted in three countries. The number of established on-farm trials (69) far exceeded the planned number (45). (100% completed)

In all countries, farmers’ associations were an integral part of the demonstration and communication activities. All countries developed technology guidelines and extension material in local languages


ACTIVITIES AND ACHIEVEMENTS Large sets of diverse germplasm for each of wheat, barley, and lentil, along with sets of triticale, oat, vetch, forage pea, and other potential fodder crops are tested on-station in Algeria (Tajikistan will rely on local germplasm), This testing will be carried out in conjunction with Output 1.2 to identify the genetic variation in crop response to CA (zero-tillage), compared to the conventional (tillage) methods. This activity was only conducted in Tajikistan and compared two winter wheat cultivars (Ormon and Alex) under bed planting and conventional tillage. The experiment was conducted in the Farming Research Institute’s experimental station in the Gissar Valley and repeated in 2014 and 2015. This was the first time that two winter wheat varieties have been compared under conventional and bed planting under irrigated conditions in Tajikistan. The most obvious benefit of bed planting is the decreased seed and irrigation rates. The results were consistent over the two years showing that bed planting was more efficient than conventional planting in terms of dry matter production and grain yield. There were no differences between the varieties in terms of productivity. In Algeria, as a result of difficulties involving in acquiring diverse germplasm of various crops, this activity was replaced with other activities that included ZT, crop rotations, and stubble management with weed management, and the integration of fodder/grain species. Conduct adaptive trials integrating CA technologies (ZT, crop rotations, and stubble management) with weed and nutrient management, and the integration of fodder/grain species in at least 45 onfarm trials (multi-year, 15 initiated in Year 1 and an additional 15 initiated in each of Years 2 and 3), spread across the three target countries (Tajikistan, Tunisia, and Algeria). Adaptive CA trials integrating ZT, crop rotations, weed management, nutrient management, and the integration of fodder/grain species were conducted in the three countries. The number of established onfarm trials (69) established over three years far exceeded the number planned (45) (Table 15). During the first year of the project and because of the late arrival of the no-till seeders, the number of on-farm trials was lower. But with the arrival of the John Shearer no-till seeders, the number of on-farm demonstrations jumped from 2 to 26 in Algeria for instance. On-farm demonstrations were planned to be implemented in relatively remote areas in each country. This made it very difficult for the national teams to establish the trials because of the transportation of equipment and accommodation for the engineers and technicians. The national teams did not have a trailer or a pick-up truck to transport the seeders from one location to another and had to rely on slow speed tractors to carry seeders from one field to the next. During the seeding season, the teams worked from dawn to dusk to ensure the establishment of the maximum number of on-farm demonstrations. This entailed not only long working days, but required them to stay in the rural areas (the technicians and engineers were away from their families for a week or two). The development of CLCA packages takes place over time. After a two-year period of field trials and demonstrations, a large amount of validation work, as well as technical capacity building of project staff, is still needed. Further to this, the engagement of farmers in the development of CLCA technology packages remains a crucial component. By actively integrating farmers’ experiences, (factoring in their attitudes to risk and adoption behavior characteristics), the development of CLCA packages will be both practical and relevant to local agro-ecological environments and optimized for each context to facilitate adoption.

48

49


Table 15. Number of on-farm (F) and on-station (S) experiments established in each country TRIAL

NUMBER OF ON-FARM (F) AND ON-STATION (S) TRIALS Tunisia 2013/14

ZT grain trials

1S

Algeria

2014/15 2013/14

TOTAL

Tajikistan

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

1S

1S

17F, 1S

3F, 3S

3F, 3S

10S, 26F

16F

1S

1S

1F, 1S

1F, 1S

4S, 18F

Weed management

4F

4F

Rotation

4F

2F

ZT forage trials

Seeding date

8F 1F

1F

3F*

8F 3F

Nutrient management

1F, 1S

1F, 1S

2S, 2F

Disease management

1F

1F

2F

Seeding rate

1F

1F

2F

2S, 3F

2S, 19F

Total

2S, 8F

2S, 26F

4S, 5F

4S, 5F

16S, 69F

*The land of one of the farmers was grazed without consultation.

Several other achievements/success stories under this output are reported in other sections of this report, particularly in the innovation section, in order to highlight the integration with other project outputs. The initial findings from on-station and on-farm activities generated site-specific CA packages for each country and the districts/ecosystems where the project activities were concentrated. This is summarized below: COUNTRY

CROPPING SYSTEM

CA PACKAGE

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Tunisia

Rainfed

Optimized wheat production under CA

Wheat following vetch crop with 95 kg/ha of nitrogen fertilizer is the best option

Rainfed

Forages for an effective and flexible entry point to CA

Flexible options to use forage crops (i.e. spring and summer grazing, hay, double purpose, and soil amendment) and practical entry points to CA. Among forage legumes, vetch and sulla clover seeds are readily available in Tunisia

Rainfed

Best forages for weedy fallow replacement

Among the six different forage species and mixtures tested, vetch and vetch/cereal mixtures were found to be the most productive and practical option for farmers

Rainfed

Effective weed control with herbicides and tine type seeders

Yields of barley and wheat significantly increased with the application of pre emergence glyphosate. Tine seeders were also recommended as better weed control options than disk seeders

Irrigated

Reduced irrigation for direct-seeded wheat and barley

A 30 to 40% reduction in irrigation water was recommended in CA, but this needs further assessment to solidify the initial observations

Irrigated

Double cropping for higher productivity and profitability

Mung beans were recommended as a double cropping option to follow wheat during the summer months. Other summer crops should also be tested for further recommendations

Tunisia

Tunisia

Algeria

Algeria

Tajikistan


50

Conclusions National counterparts from Tunisia, Algeria, and Tajikistan established more than 85 on-farm demonstrations and on-station experiments over the three years. Through practical interactions with producers, technicians, scientists, and policy makers, site-specific CA packages were developed for each country and disseminated through publications, field days, and training courses. Almost all demonstration and scientific trials illustrated the benefits of CA compared to conventional systems. Hence, the project experience shows that when technical necessities, such as no-till seeders, are available and practitioners are competent, CA can be adopted by farmers in mixed dryland production systems.

OUTPUT 2.1. Capacity development, co-

learning, and knowledge and information dissemination in the target areas and across the CWANA region

The project completed a large number of activities in the area of capacity development, with ICARDA playing a lead role in facilitating and delivering training. This is clearly demonstrated in the activity summary in Table 16 and Annexes 1 to 6. This component, being cross-cutting across all other activities, is also referred to in the knowledge management section. It is important to recognize that the levels of skills and capabilities of project participants was extremely variable between the participating countries. This is largely a reflection of past experience and familiarity with the development of CLCA systems, professional contact with R&D expertise specifically related to CLCA, and to participatory development and extension approaches. There is a significant opportunity to further develop the capacity of the project staff and National Agricultural Research Services’ (NARS’) stakeholders across all three countries, noting that by far the greatest needs are in Tajikistan. In recent years, there has been a concerted effort to recruit agricultural science graduates in both Algeria and Tunisia to undertake on-farm applied research and extension activities. Such initiatives are to be commended. However, these young professionals would benefit considerably from further training and development, and, importantly, flexible mentoring programs provided by practically-focused, internationally-recognized technical and participatory extension experts. The project has achieved an excellent level of participation in project activities by postgraduate students originating from the NARS system, particularly in Tunisia and Algeria. In the case of Tajikistan, it is important to encourage and foster future engagement of English-speaking students in postgraduate research on CLCA systems. The preference would be to identify postgraduate research opportunities in Englishspeaking countries that are also considered leaders in the development of CLCA systems. This could include, for example, sandwich research programs. This will broaden the horizons of the students and assist in overcoming the isolation of Tajikistan from international research.

51


Table 16. Level of completion of activities under Output 2.1 ACHIEVEMENTS Outputs 2.1. Capacity development, co-learning, and knowledge and information dissemination in the target areas and across the CWANA region. At least 15 NARES representatives and 60 farmers (from 10 to 30 in each country) trained in workshops and training courses, with 500 trained through field days. Three Masters students trained

By the end of the project, at least 470 NARES staff trained in workshops and 1113 farmers were trained through field days

5 PhD students (1 completed) 12 BSc and MSc students (4 completed) 1 service provider established 100%

Activities 2.1.1. Develop and enhance farmer-participatory capacity by creating innovation platforms (training courses and materials) for delivering adapted CLCA technologies •

100%

At least 60 farmers and service providers trained during each cropping season

• Field days (one per region, one to three regions per country) will be conducted each year to disseminate information to NARES and farming policy makers and the private sector 2.1.2 Advanced training of farmers, extension agents, and service providers in using CLCA technologies for improving crop and livestock productivity to facilitate adoption of CLCA-based technologies in the target regions •

At least 15 extension agents trained at ICARDA during the first two cropping seasons 2.1.3. Organize degree and non-degree training for NARES and lead farmers in CLCA at ICARDA to facilitate technology transfer to other staff and farmers

•

Three NARS researchers trained for MSc degrees during project implementation in their respective countries/ICARDA

•

At least four field days conducted during each cropping season 2.1.4. Involve policy makers in project initiation workshops, in field visits, and in the innovation platforms to ensure their buy-in and support for an enabling environment for CA adoption (involvement of extension agents and farmers’ organizations, subsidy policies, regulatory issues, etc.)

•

Over 15 extension agents trained at ICARDA in statistical analysis, crop-livestock integration, use of FEAST, weed management, and ZT seeders (> 100%)

Policy makers and the private sector invited and attending the initiation workshop, annual planning workshops, field visits, and final workshop

At least 18 field days were conducted targeting more than 1000 farmers In addition, five PhD and eight MSc students from NARES are preparing their theses on this project

100% completed 100%

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Implementation arrangements

52

IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS The project was managed by ICARDA in its role as the coordinating agency. Within ICARDA, the project was led by the Diversification and Sustainable Intensification of Production Systems Program (DSPSP). Field implementation and close follow up of the project activities were undertaken by the regional offices of ICARDA in Tunis (for Algeria and Tunisia) and in Tashkent (for Tajikistan). Timely implementation and overall project management was ensured by the ICARDA project coordinator. In addition to the project coordinator, who was an agronomist in the first year and an animal nutritionist for the subsequent two years, ICARDA’s science team included an agronomist, a forage specialist, a rangeland scientist, a small-ruminant specialist, and an animal nutritionist. The project was jointly implemented with the Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique de Tunisie (INRAT), ITGC in Algeria, and the Tajik Academy of Agricultural Sciences (TAAS) in Dushanbe, Tajikistan. ICARDA signed specific Memoranda of Agreement with these three NARS institutions, which covered the technical and financial statements related to the implementation of the project components in each of the three countries. Other key national partners were; •

Institut National Agronomique de Tunisie and Office de l’Elevage et des Pâturages in Tunisia

•

Haut-Commissariat pour le Développement de la Steppe in Algeria.

Technical work plans were agreed during annual meetings, in which representatives of the three countries participated. Furthermore, a project Steering Committee was formed, which met following the technical work plan meetings and was in charge of the overall project management, governance, and monitoring of progress towards outcomes. A full list of the participants in this project by country and by institution is given in Annex 7. Throughout the progress of the project, IFAD was regularly represented in the technical work plan meetings and as an observing member in the Steering Committee meetings. The IFAD representatives were, therefore, able to interact with the large team of scientists from ICARDA and the NARS and this interaction was extremely important for agreeing the conceptual framework and to re-orient some project activities so that they better answered the main research questions that the project sought to address.

53

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Innovation

INNOVATION The project succeeded in developing several technical innovations in the different contexts in which it operated. Some of these technical innovations are documented below. From a more global point of view, the innovative approaches, which the project introduced when working with the farmers have resulted in the development of affordable and adaptable CLCA technologies. These are flexible and adapted to the local context. The growing farmer interest and motivation present an ideal basis for changing longterm practices. The adoption of CLCA systems is a systems-thinking process, which takes place over an extended period of time, given the complexity of the system and the need to develop regional ‘best management practices’ and benchmarks. The project has identified and addressed the needs of the target audience (small landholders), based on a detailed ex ante farm household socioeconomic analysis. The project has succeeded in characterizing the CLCA systems in the three countries. It has provided a clear indication of the levels of integration needed between cropping and livestock activities and their effects on CA adoption. This characterization provides the background for further analytical studies that can allow more tailored and effective CLCA systems in the study areas. Furthermore, strong farmer engagement and an exhaustive number of on-farm demonstrations, coupled to regular farmer consultation and feedback, have helped to ensure strong project relevance. The project addresses three critical elements – water and food security, and maximizing farm profitability. Farmers can implement practical changes that having lasting benefits to all in the community. The following boxes are meant to illustrate a number of technical and organizational innovations that were brought about by the project or which are expected to be influenced by the project outcomes in the near future, for example the national program of fallow resorption in Algeria (Box 5). Box 5. Fallow resorption program in Algeria: a venue to scale out the CLCA system in the Algerian steppes The introduction of cereal-legume mixtures, such as oat, triticale, and vetch crops, for the purpose of providing fodder crops for livestock, has provided extremely encouraging results to date. They have largely replace weed fallows in Algeria, Tunisia, and Tajikistan. Further development of this system, and, in particular, the increased monitoring and analysis of the benefits to livestock production and subsequent crops (and overall farm profitability) is needed. The results of the project are already being considered by the Fallow Resorption Program in the steppes of Algeria. This program has a longterm goal of re-integrating over 3 million ha of fallow into more agronomically-sound and profitable production systems promoting pulses and forage crops. In its quinquennial (2015-2019) phase, the program has the following objectives: - - - -

Resorption of 500,000 ha before the year 2020; 125,000 as pulses and 375,000 as forage crops Creation of a seed system for pulses and forage crops to support the program Creation of 100,000 jobs Enhancing research in pulses and forage cropping.

The fallow resorption program is exclusively financed by the National Fund for Agricultural Development. Interestingly, ITGC is leading this national program and this will ease and facilitate the process of taking up the CLCA findings into it. M’Sila and Sétif are the two main target sites amongst the districts where this program has been implemented.

54


Box 6. Direct seeding of mung bean after the wheat harvest in Tajikistan: two crops in one year (Tajikistan) In the irrigated areas of Tajikistan, land remains fallow for more than three months after the cereal harvest in the cereal-based systems. The intensity of land use could be increased through double cropping with legume crops, but the required field preparation in conventional agriculture does not allow for timely seeding. The direct seeding method under CA shortens the time needed for field preparation and creates an opportunity for a second crop in the summer season. Double cropping could help to prevent soil erosion and break the pest cycles currently encouraged by cereal monoculture. It would thereby reduce pesticide use. There are also other legume crops, such as kidney bean and forage pea, which can be used as summer crops after the winter wheat harvest. Net Return (USD/ha)

Benefit Cost Ratio

1600

4.5

1400

4 3.5

1200

3

1000

2.5

800

2

600

1.5

400

1

200

0.5 0

0 Conventional agriculture


Benefit Cost Ratio

Grain yield and net return

Grain yield (kg/ha)

55


Box 7. Achieving significant reductions in the use of irrigation water through CA (Algeria) CA was introduced in some of the driest parts of Algeria where water is a precious resource. Farmers’ trials in M’Sila demonstrated that there was an opportunity to reduce significantly the amount of irrigation water applied to crops produced under a ZT seeding system without any yield penalties when compared to conventionally sown crops. Farmers’ evidence has identified a significant reduction (30 to 40%) in water requirements for irrigated crops where ZT has been adopted. The time it takes under flood irrigation for water to travel the distance of the irrigation bays is reduced by as much as 50% in the initial irrigation under ZT compared to conventionally sown crops. This reflects a net decrease in the total volume of water pumped onto the crop. •

Preserving the natural resource, in this case scarce water resources, provides a significant additional benefit from developing integrated CLCA systems

•

Improved irrigation practices through the introduction of sprinklers and ZT seeding systems present enormous opportunities for water savings in M’Sila district and similar agro-ecologies in the steppe of Algeria Irrigation cost

Number of irrigations

7

70

6 5

50

4

40

3 2

30

1

20

0 Conservation agriculture

Conventional agriculture

Irrigations

Cost (USD/ha)

60

56


Box 8. Effective weed control for boosting wheat productivity (Algeria) Weed control is the backbone of successful CA systems. The project introduced and demonstrated effective weed control techniques. Where weed treatments were introduced, the yields achieved were two to three times larger than those obtained in untreated fields. The yields of barley and wheat increased from 2000 kg/ha to as much as 6000 kg/ha. This is a significant achievement for food security and the livelihoods of the crop-livestock farmers in the project area. Opting for tine seeders (promoted by ICARDA in the WANA region), in combination with grazing, decreases weed biomass. This is a very much 'healthier' alternative for weed control than using chemicals, which are expensive, not easily accessible in the production areas, and not consistent with the environmentally-friendly concept of CA. Early grazing of the crops in irrigated systems and intercropping are other alternatives to be pursued.

Grain yield (kg/ha)

6000

4000

2000

0

Grazed stubble Dry matter weed biomass r (kg/ha)

Control not weeded Glyphosate only Glyphosate+ early weeding

No Grazing

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

Barely grain

Wheat grain

Disc seeder

Tine seeder

Tilled

57


Box 9. Reducing diseases in wheat fields with a CA package in rotation with vetch (Tunisia) Tan spot of wheat, also known as helminthosporiosis, is the second most important fungal wheat disease as regards distribution and economic damage (significant yield loss of up to 50% or even complete crop failure). In recent years, crop management change (wheat monoculture and conservation tillage including no-till) has led to an increase in the severity and incidence of tan spot. An integrated CA approach (including proper crop rotation and cultivation practices) is required in order to control this fungal disease. The project showed farmers that under a CA system, the lowest mean disease incidence was recorded on durum wheat when the previous crop was vetch. This result could be explained by the positive effect of vetch on durum wheat plant nutrition (a healthy plant seems to better withstand the disease development) and by the use of a non-host crop as a previous crop (vetch in our case). In fact, rotations including vetch (a non-host crop for tan spot) seem to reduce the amount of soil inoculum for the next crop, which in turn controls tan spot. Conventional agriculture


9 8.5

Incidence (%)

8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4

Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4


Box 10. Forages replacing weedy fallows for increased feed quality and livestock productivity (Tunisia) Allocating one-third of the land for a weedy fallow to be grazed in late winter/early spring before plowing for the next crop is a prevailing practice in North Africa. By doing so, farmers believe that they gain a cost-free fodder resource while the soil recovers its fertility. When selecting a forage to replace the fallow, common vetch and sulla were chosen being the only forages for which certified seeds can be found in the local seed market. Seeding directly into the weedy fallow is made possible by the notill seeder. Glyphosate for weed control will no longer be required as vetch, cereal vetch mixture, and sulla perform well and suppress weed competition. However, Phosphate fertilizer is required to stimulate rhizobia symbiosis and seedling vigor. These alternatives extend the time during which the soil remains covered and less prone to erosion and water loss. Soil analyses will be undertaken at seeding time in the fall of 2016 to check the soil nitrogen status to see how it is affected by this practice. Averaged over six farmers’ demonstrations, the forages yielded more than two to three times the yield of the weedy fallows. A new institutional arrangement has been developed in Tunisia for vetch seed production. With the help and assistance of national partners of the CLCA project, local farmers from the region of Siliana, Tunisia succeeded in establishing a farmers’ cooperative for seed production and distribution. The Office de l’Elevage et des Pâturages (OEP), the main public institution with a mandate to develop rangeland, forage, and livestock production in the country, is supporting this particular cooperative to collect and process the vetch seeds. Making the most of vetch With an initial 16% (biomass 4.6 t dry matter/ha) crude protein content in June and a final 8% (biomass 2.5 t dry matter/ha) in August (project data from Siliana), the dried grazed vetch supports the nutrient requirements of the sheep, promotes growth, and increases farm profitability.

58

59

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Knowledge management

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT The fourth output of the project, knowledge management and the dissemination of information, is cross cutting and closely linked to capacity development. The project addressed knowledge dissemination through group training courses for various stakeholders, field days, student involvement, training of trainers, and creating linkages with other projects in the areas. The project also generated awareness through publicly available flyers, academic publications, project posters, and national news coverage. Several group training courses were offered to about 471 participants (23% female) covering the three main components plus a set of training courses that were cross cutting or general (Annex 1). In total, 26 topics were covered through these activities. The greatest number of participants attended courses and training related to the livestock and forage components. Female participation in these components was 34%. Getting females to attend the CA component was more difficult to achieve. However, Algeria and Tajikistan did have a few female attendants in one training course that was held. Algeria had the largest overall attendance, including female participants. In total, 1113 farmers and extension specialists benefited from the 18 field days. Algeria, with 502 participants in seven events, had the highest representation. It was followed by Tajikistan with 421 participants in seven events. Tunisia had 190 participants in four events (Annex 2). Student involvement and exposure is important in generating awareness and providing leadership for the next generation of agricultural workers. Student involvement in the project was strongest in Tunisia where 12 students were involved. One Tajik student and four Algerian students were involved in the project (Annex 3). The frequent visits of ICARDA scientists to the project sites and their interactions with NARES representatives and farmers were very much appreciated. During these visits, several activities were undertaken, including: •

On-the-job training of scientists and students

•

Supervision and monitoring of experimental trials (on-station and on-farm)

•

Organization of field days

•

Interactions with local and national authorities.

Cross collaboration and learning was further enhanced by linking with other projects. The project linked up with: •

An IFAD-funded project in Siliana, Tunisia

•

An ACIAR-funded Conservation Agriculture in North Africa (CANA) project in the Maghreb (Tunisia, Morocco, and Algeria)

•

An FAO project in Central Asia (Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan)

•

A DFID/BMZ-funded project in Tajikistan.

Often the national staff involved in the implementation of this project also worked on other similar projects in different areas of the country. This was helpful, as the other projects were able to fill the training gaps that could not be achieved within the CLCA one. Lessons learned from one project could be directly applied to the others. In Jordan, a project staff member who worked on seeders for CA supported our project in making adjustments to the project seeders. This created very useful synergy for the new technologies and concepts that were introduced, helping project interventions reach a tipping point for lasting change and impact more quickly. CA has been practiced for a long time in North Africa, but is considered a new practice in Central Asia. Therefore, project participants from Central Asia were flown to North Africa during the annual meetings where they could learn through an exchange of expertise.

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Knowledge management

Awareness of the new knowledge was generated through publicly available flyers, academic publications, project posters, and national news coverage. In all, 12 conference papers were generated through this project, three manuscripts were accepted and one is being prepared. Tunisian scientists prepared three flyers: •

CA for animal husbandry and breeding in Tunisia (in Arabic and French)

•

Integrated crop-livestock CA for sustainable intensification of cereal-based systems in North Africa and Central Asia (in English and Arabic)

•

CA for a sustainable intensification of cereal production systems in North Africa (in French and Arabic).

For Tajikistan a flyer was prepared on CA in the local language. These flyers have helped to generate awareness in broader audiences and were made available at government offices and through extension and public partners. For the scientific audience, four conference posters were generated from Tunisia, four from Algeria, and two from Tajikistan. The posters show project approaches, data, and results. One poster shows the effect of agricultural practices and stocking rate on the performance of Barbarine ewes grazing on wheat stubble in Tunisian semi-arid conditions (Annex 4). The information linking livestock grazing with CA cropping is important to support the change in practices; it shows that the new practices are more successful in livestock production. The different posters also show the differences in the research across countries and regions. Factsheets are an effective communication product to raise awareness about a particular topic as they emphasize key points briefly in a simple way. Ten factsheets were produced for the various activities of the project, six from Tunisia, one from Algeria, one from Tajikistan, and two across countries from ICARDA. The project introduced CA to Tajikistan where it had not been implemented before. It became national news (http://www.cac-program.org/video) and a large audience was given an overview of the practice and its benefits. Box 11. Endorsement by the Tajik Minister of Agriculture Perhaps the Tajik Academy of Agricultural Sciences’ (TAAS) field day was the most important achievement of the CLCA project in Tajikistan. The field day was attended by the Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Mahmadtoir Zokirov, and featured the John Shearer no-till seeder purchased by the CLCA project. Almost all the speakers, including the president of TAAS and the Minister of Agriculture, talked about the benefits of CA and said that for the first time in Tajikistan no-till seeding had been introduced thanks to the ICARDA CLCA project. Most importantly, the practical application of CA was demonstrated on-farm by seeding mung bean as a summer double crop directly after the wheat harvest. Farmers witnessed the effectiveness of this technique and were impressed by the fact that mung bean could be seeded without cultivation. This event showed that our efforts to promote CA in Tajikistan are being met by great interest. With the right support, adoption and up-scaling could be very fast. A booklet has been produced by TAAS that features the John Shearer seeder on the cover.

60

61

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Scaling up and sustainability

SCALING UP AND SUSTAINABILITY In terms of sustainability, one very strong indicator is the farmer engagement and cohesion with all project teams. Assessing environmental sustainability was not possible because of the short life span of the project, but this could be addressed through the research experiments that the national teams will maintain. As discussed during the last Steering Committee (6 April 2016 in Amman, Jordan), a second phase of this project, whether funded by IFAD or another donor, cannot start until mid-2017. Therefore, the long-term, on-station trials need to be maintained during the bridging period which could cover two cropping seasons (2015/16 and 2016/17). The national teams in Algeria and Tunisia have already committed to maintain all onstation and on-farm trials during 2015/16 using their own resources. Data to be collected during the bridging period are unique in the sense that they will consolidate some of the results achieved to date. ICARDA will also support this bridging period. Tajikistan would need external funding to be able to cover the costs of the bridging period until a new source of funding is arranged to support a second phase of the project. There was an overwhelming response from farmers in relation to their need to be able to access low cost ZT seed drills to adopt ZT seeding systems. The benefits of the ZT seeding systems have been clearly demonstrated to farmers involved in the onfarm demonstrations or who had attended farmers’ field days. The affordability of such equipment was considered to be a potential major barrier to adoption. While the use of the imported John Shearer seed drills has provided outstanding results, few if any of the targeted farmers are in a position to purchase such equipment. While some other projects have encouraged the local development and manufacture of suitable seed drills (e.g. the ACIAR funded CANA project that has now been completed), it is necessary to follow up on these earlier initiatives and provide technical support and encouragement to local manufacturers. Several prototypes have been developed in Tunisia, Algeria, and Tajikistan’s neighbor, Uzbekistan. Critical to the success of the widespread adoption of ZT seeding systems in ICARDA’s CA project in Syria and northern Iraq was the development of locally manufactured seed drills. A similar approach is warranted in Central Asia and North Africa. In addition, there are a range of other approaches for enhancing farmers’ access to affordable machinery that needs to be explored. These include local community group ownership and the encouragement of local contractors to provide ZT sowing services to smaller-scale farmers. It was reported that through the CANA project, the INGC (Tunisia) team were coming close to developing a local prototype machine with a local Tunisian manufacturer. It is critical that this outcome remains a priority and is followed through to the point of the large scale manufacture of such equipment. Developing a range of models for machinery ownership, syndication, and contracting services for small-scale farmers needs to be developed to ensure wide-scale adoption. Many of the Tunisian project team members were also involved in the CANA project, which focused on developing ZT seeding systems for smallscale landholders. This provided additional benefits to the project team members in terms of training and capacity building, as well as access to Australian expertise in agronomy, crop protection, and agricultural machinery design, especially for ZT seeding systems.

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Scaling up and sustainability

62

In Tajikistan, while a new center for agricultural machinery research has been established (Figure 11), there are few resources and limited expertise available to undertake applied field research work. To establish the research unit, it will be important to ensure that there is an adequate level of financial resources provided, in addition to building the capacity of the staff (in such issues as the principles of CA and machinery design, appropriate field trial research protocols, and agronomic assessments). While there were no specific issues in relation to the capability and skills of farmers to adopt the improved systems, there is the issue of financial capacity. Farmers do not necessarily have the financial capacity to purchase outright the specialized ZT seed drills themselves, given the high cost of the currently imported equipment. Should locally available (manufactured) drills become available, farmers indicated that they would be prepared to pay in the order of USD 6000 to USD 12,000 for such equipment. Figure 11. The workshop of the recently established TAAS Agricultural Machinery Research Unit, featuring the John Shearer ZT seed drill. (Photo: J. Cummins)

The project results confirmed the versatility of vetch as a forage legume species that can be used in many ways (hay in spring, or green grazed in spring or summer, in pure stand, or mixed with cereals, etc.). A number of farmers have shown interest in vetch and its effect on animal intake and performance. However, the availability of seed of improved vetch varieties needs to be addressed for potential up-scaling. This issue may be solved gradually, as one of the main achievements of the project was the establishment of the first agricultural service association/provider with focus on CA in Tunisia. On 13 June 2015, the 'Mutual Association of Agricultural Services' (SMSA) et Taaoun was created for the farmers of Chouarnia and Sned Haddad and any other areas in the Siliana Governorate and neighboring regions. Such services would guarantee the continuity and sustainability of the project.

63

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Monitoring and evaluation

MONITORING AND EVALUATION Monitoring, evaluation, and learning system The project management team, in collaboration with the project partners, and linked with other IFAD funded projects and the CGIAR Research Program on Dryland Systems, developed a monitoring, evaluation and learning system within the broader CGIAR mandate for results-based management. The tool is available at http://mel.cgiar.org/projects/clca. More information is available on http://mel.cgiar. org/reporting/outputsreport/id/2695/year/2016 The online portal allows the login for all project partners and timely reporting in accordance with the agreed logical framework. The developed system is currently used by other projects and will be sustained thanks to the engagement with other initiatives funded by IFAD and other donors. As it is a tool that has been adopted by other institutions, it is maintained by continuous funding from new individual projects and it guarantees long-term maintenance after each project ends. All knowledge produced is maintained, indexed, and exchanged in a customizable open-access platform. This enables the transparent documentation of implementation processes and results, and easy knowledge sharing with stakeholders. The core team and partners have been involved from the beginning of the project. The tool was structured to reflect the reality of project implementation. This resulted in more sustainable approaches that would improve the knowledge of project planning, monitoring, evaluation, and learning for future initiatives in the region of the project stakeholders.

Thanks to this approach, the team has followed the agreed logical framework and achieved the expected results as detailed below. The framework’s verifiable indicators are updated periodically and an analysis of the last two quarters data is presented in the following table.

64


Intervention logic narrative summary Outputs 1.1. Ex ante evaluation of CA-based technologies in CWANA

1.2. Enhanced croplivestock integration in CA through optimized stubble grazing strategies and increased fodder availability from forages or fodder shrubs

1.3. Site-specific CA finetuned and disseminated for enhanced farm productivity, resource use efficiency, and profitability

2.1. Capacity development, co-learning, and knowledge and information dissemination in the target areas and across the CWANA region

Objectively verifiable indicators

1.1.1. Development of baseline data in the target regions on farming and tillage practices, crop choices, and farmers’ perceptions. New farm surveys will be conducted using a representative random sample of the farming community. These will include data on crop residue management, feeding strategies, and resource flow maps for ex ante analysis

1.1.2. Expert estimates of the agronomic benefits of CA options will be systematically solicited from researchers and extension staff where on-farm data is not available

Progress by the end of the 3-year grant Jan 2016

Strategies for promoting uptake and out-scaling of CA practices by month 36

100% 100% completed for the Tunisian and completed for Algerian platforms and 90% completed for the Algerian, the Tajik platform Tunisian, and Tajik platforms

First report on grazing strategy available by month 12, validated by month 24 (second report)

- A stubble management tool was developed in Tunisia after Year 1, was further refined after Year 2. It awaits validation after the current third year’s on-station and on-farm trials. Also, to evaluate and complete the model with regard to its meeting the ewe’s nutritional requirements, intake measurements were carried out on-station (Achieved 75%) - A similar tool is being developed for Algeria (Achieved 75%)

100% after incorporation into the model of the current on-station and on-farm grazing trials

CA-adaptive trials for rotations, weed management, variety selection, and irrigation were tested in all locations and recommendations are being packaged (Achieved 75%)

100%

Detailed reports on CA-adaptive trials available by months 12, 24, and 36 Recommendations on crop management practices available by month 30 At least 15 NARES’ representatives and 60 farmers (from 10 to 30 per country) trained in workshops, with 500 trained through field days. Three Master’s degree students

Activities

Progress to Sep 2015, proportion of target achieved

At completion of Year 2, 280 NARES’ staff trained in workshops and 357 trained through field days (Achieved 75%) Students’ involvement in the project activities exceeded the targets set. Figures at completion of Year 2 are five undergraduate students, four Master students and five5 PhD students (Achieved 100%)

> 100%

> 100%



Ex ante economic analyses of CA 100% completed for the Tunisian and technologies Algerian platforms (reports delivered) and completed by month 100% completed for the Tajik platform 18

100% completed for the Tunisian and Algerian platforms (reports delivered) and 100% completed for the Tajik platform

Baseline data collected by month 6

65


Intervention logic narrative summary


1.1.3. An economic evaluation, including a financial risk assessment, will be made of the CA technologies and tradeoffs that farmers face

1.1.4. Optimal livestock production and CA cropping systems will be determined for different farming systems under different costs and price scenarios

1.1.5 Monitor the adoption of CA technologies with follow up surveys and identify constraints to and determinants of adoption

1.1.6. Identify gender limitations and advantages that can promote adoption of CA and determine if CA will increase the labor burden on women

1.2.1. In the on-station (Years 1 and 2 at Sétif) and the 30 on-farm stubble grazing experiments (multi-year, 15 initiated in Year 2 and an additional 15 initiated in Year 3), crop residue off take through different grazing strategies will be measured



100% completed (for the economic evaluation) for the Tunisian and Algerian platforms (reports delivered) and 100% completed for the Tajik platform

100% completed (for the economic evaluation) for the Tunisian and Algerian platforms (reports on-going) and 100% completed for the Tajik platform

Optimal production under different scenarios developed 80% and shared with stakeholders

The dissemination of CA documented

100% completed for the three platforms (repots for the cropping season 2014/15 are on-going)

100% completed for the Tunisian and The impact of CA on Algerian platforms (sections included in women documented the baseline reports delivered)

Grazing strategies presenting different levels of residue retention and proportions of energy and protein intake by grazing sheep described. First estimates by month 18 Trade-offs between biomass intake (lost residue retention) and direct manuring assessed by month 30 On-station experiments at Sétif, Algeria and in Tajikistan (if possible). At least 15 multi-year onfarm trials initiated in each of Years 2 and 3

First estimates were obtained in Tunisia by 18 months and then confirmed in Tunisia and Algeria by month 24. The full report will be available by month 36 (Achieved 75%)

100%

100% completed for the three platforms (repots for the cropping season 2014/15 are on-going) 100% completed for the Tunisian and Algerian platforms (sections included in the baseline reports delivered)

100%

Soil samples taken in Algeria for one year and data is being analyzed (50%)

100%

In addition to Sétif, the number of onfarm trials in Algeria reached 27 in Year 3 (90%), 18 in Tunisia, and 10 in Tajikistan

100%

66




Fast growing and high nutritive value 1.2.2. Grazing strategies will fodder species be evaluated with regard to identified for alley meeting the ewe’s nutritional cropping by month requirements 24 and confirmed by month 36 1.2.3. The effect of nutrient recycling (urine and fecal excretion) on soil fertility will be assessed considering the differences between daytime grazing only and day and night time grazing 1.2.4. Fast growing high biomass and quality fodder species will be tested on-station and on-farm for compatibility with annual crops. Already identified germplasm will be grown in Year 1. Plant cover (establishment, vigor, and growth over time) of crop and fodder resources will be monitored under CA in conjunction with Output 1.3

1.2.5. Appropriate feeding strategies will be developed for using these species as fodder for improving livestock productivity

1.3.1. Large sets of diverse germplasm for each of wheat, barley, and lentil, along with sets of triticale, oat, vetch, forage pea, and other potential fodder crops will be tested on-station in Algeria and Tajikistan, in conjunction with Output 1.2 to identify the genetic variation in crop response to CA (ZT), compared to the conventional (tillage) methods

Carbon and nitrogen recycling assessment Forage crops and suitable crop establishment options identified in first crop season and validated both on-station and on-farm after the second season


For low and medium rainfall areas in each target country, potential forage crops (forage pea and vetch) grown in association with shrubs in alley-cropping system demonstrated (Achieved 100%) Under laboratory conditions, urine and fecal excretion amounts (8 sheep for 4 weeks) were evaluated and converted to a carbon and nitrogen basis to estimate soil inputs coming from sheep flock


100%

100%

Forage legumes and cereals were tested under CA for their productivity in crop rotations (Achieved 100%)

Different shrub species were tested in all three countries and the best species were identified. Data related to shrub establishment, vigor, and growth have been collected and are being analyzed (Achieved 100%)

100%

Data is available from Algeria specifically and this will be analyzed after completion of data collection and laboratory analysis following this year’s trials (Achieved 50%)

100%

This was only done in Tajikistan with wheat. Elsewhere, it was difficult to obtain large sets of germplasm for the different crops tested (Achieved 20 %)

20%

Alley cropping technology has been adopted to improve integrated crop-livestock feeding options and evaluated on at least three sites in Algeria and will be integrated into Activity 1.3.3 Particulate organic matter and soil water infiltration capacity increased in response to improved grazing management

Suitable genotypes selected for CA trials by month 24 (two seasons) One location in Tajikistan and one location at Sétif, Algeria, in combination with 1.2.4

67



1.3.2. Selected, promising lines will be analyzed for feed quality as a fodder/ grain crop and validated in on-farm variety trials with participating farmers

1.3.3. Conduct adaptive trials integrating CA technologies (ZT, crop rotations, and stubble management) with weed and nutrient management, and the integration of fodder/grain species in at least 45 on-farm trials (multi-year, 15 initiated in Year 1 and an additional 15 initiated in each of Years 2 and 3), spread across the three target countries (Tajikistan, Tunisia, and Algeria) 1.3.4. These activities will be conducted with farmers’ groups and local farmers’ organizations will be the key vehicle that will involve large number of farmers and which will promote farmerto-farmer learning and communications

2.1.1. Develop and enhance farmer-participatory capacity by creating innovation platforms (training courses and materials) for delivering adapted CLCA technologies

2.1.2. Advanced training of farmers, extension agents, and service providers in using CLCA technologies for improving crop and livestock productivity to facilitate adoption of CLCA based technologies in the target regions


Crop rotations tested by month 18 (second season)

Progress to Sep 2015, proportion of target achieved In three locations and for both on-station and on-farm trials, several crop rotations are under investigation. Preliminary results were available by month 24 (Achieved 100%) Selected forage species were analyzed for feed quality and validated using the FEAST tool in Tunisia and Algeria (Achieved 75%)

Progress by the end of the 3-year grant Jan 2016 100%

100%

Site-specific crop management recommendations ready by month 18 At least 15-new multi-year on-farm trials initiated per year and conducted across the target sites. These will integrate with activities 1.2.4 (alley/ relay cropping), 1.3.1 crops, and CA (1.3.3 tillage)

CA adaptive trials for rotations, weed management, variety selection, and irrigation were tested in all locations and recommendations are being packaged (Achieved 75%)

100%

100%

This occurred in Algeria (100%) and partly in Tunisia (50%)

Extension material developed in Tunisia and Tajikistan (Achieved 75%)

100%

100%

100%

Over 15 extension agents trained at ICARDA in statistical analysis, croplivestock integration, use of FEAST, weed management, and ZT seeders (>100%)

> 100%

Technology guidelines and extension material ready by month 24 At least 60 farmers and service providers trained during each cropping season Field days (one per region, one to three regions per country) will be conducted each year to disseminate information to NARES, farming policy maker, and the private sector

At least 15 extension agents trained at ICARDA during the first two cropping seasons

68






2.1.3. Organize degree and non-degree training for NARES staff and lead farmers in CLCA at ICARDA to facilitate technology transfer to other staff and farmers

Three NARS researchers trained for MSc degrees during project implementation in respective countries/ICARDA. At least four field days conducted during each cropping season

100% completed. In addition, one PhD student is preparing his thesis on this project

> 100%

2.1.4. Involve policy makers in project initiation workshops, field visits, and innovation platforms to ensure buy-in and support for the enabling environment for CA adoption (involvement of extension agents and farmers’ organizations, subsidy policies, regulatory issues, etc.)

Policy makers and the private sector invited and attending the initiation workshop, annual planning workshops, field visits, and final workshop

> 100%

> 100%

69

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Financial and fiduciary management

FINANCIAL AND FIDUCIARY MANAGEMENT The financial report for the entire duration of the project shows the following situation: •

Overspending in operational costs by USD 39,100 K –13.8% increase

•

Overspending in travel (this includes international and field travel) by USD 17,900 – 9.2% increase

•

Underspending/savings in equipment and goods by $ 37,700 – 19.4% saving

•

Savings in workshops/training/publications of $ 18,200 – 9.3% saving.

Explanation for over/underspending in the budget categories When the project proposal and budget was prepared, it was planned to do a substantial amount of the technology testing on-station in Tunisia and Algeria. Accordingly we budgeted USD 193,000 for the required equipment, such as no-till seeders, fences for the grazing experiments, and other items. However, after the first year of the project, the Steering Committee decided to redirect the project implementation to on-farm testing with as many farmers as possible. This clearly required a redirection of funds to operational costs and travel. In addition, in Tunisia and Algeria the project had the opportunity to share no-till equipment with other projects active in the target areas – the ACIAR Project on Conservation Agriculture in North Africa and the IFAD investment projects. This resulted in a saving in the funds for equipment and these savings were used for operational costs and travel instead. ICARDA and the NARES collaborators also used less funds than planned for workshops and training. This part of the required capacity development activity was integrated with the implementation of project activities (on-the-job training) and the expenses absorbed under operational and travel costs. At the same time, when adjustments to project implementation were made, a change in the coordination of the project took place. Hichem Ben Salem took over the coordination from David Feindel, who left ICARDA. Because of this change, the opportunity and need for revisiting the cost category allocations and requesting a budget re-allocation from IFAD was missed. Although this omission should have been avoided, the budget has been used in the best way possible to support successful implementation of the planned project activities. The situation was fully explained to the Steering Committee on 6 April 2016 and the members approved the actual budget use and appealed to IFAD to approve the financial report.

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Conclusions and lessons learned

70

CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED Lessons learned The major project results and related lessons learned are summarized in the following points: -

The ex ante baseline adoption survey has collected a significant amount of socioeconomic information, which has proved invaluable in terms of describing the key characteristics and attributes of the targeted farming population, local farming systems, and adoption characteristics of the research audience.

-

The findings on CA practices in the irrigated drylands of North Africa show that these are superior to conventional production systems in terms of crop production and water use effciency. In Algeria, the opportunity to reduce significantly the amount of irrigated water applied to crops produced under a ZT seeding system without any yield penalties when compared to conventionally sown crops, represents a significant benefit to farmers and the environment.

-

ZT machinery is currently a major barrier to the adoption of CA in low-income countries. The project built on the achievements of other projects and initiatives and opened up avenues for farmers in each country to access low-cost ZT seed drills to replace imported drills.

-

In Algeria, the application of herbicides in Algeria was introduced as a component of the CA package. This was effective in reducing weeds and resulted in substantial yield increases. It is however costly for smallholder farmers and environmentally unfriendly. The project results seem to point out that the type of ZT seeder used has an effect on weed biomass. Indeed, tine seeders – the type of seeders advocated by ICARDA in CWANA – resulted in less weed biomass.

-

In Tajikistan, CA provided the opportunity for double cropping with the direct seeding of mung bean after the wheat harvest. This resulted in increased farm income and an additional source of livestock fodder. This intervention captured the attention of the ministerial authorities.

-

The increase in financial benefits observed in most years merits the promotion of CA on a large scale in the irrigated drylands of the CWANA region.

-

The project’s on-farm and on-station trials resulted in a number of recommendations for how to manage the integration of livestock and CA, and the entry points for successful CLCA systems: •

Including vetch, vetch-oat, and sulla in the crop rotation in Tunisia and Algeria combines the potential to increase soil fertility (in the longer term) with a significant opportunity to increase livestock production. Vetch grazing by weaned lambs yielded much higher growth results than grazing on wheat stubble or feedlot fattening. Vetch grazing by mature ewes provided simultaneous provision of energy and proteins, which clearly improved the mating performance when compared to ewes grazing cereal stubble. These fodder plants represent options to replace unproductive ‘fallow practices’ in Tunisia and Algeria and offer the opportunity to significantly increase farm profitability, largely through increased livestock production.

•

In North Africa, where cereal stubble grazing commonly provides 70 to 80% of the animals’ intake during the first two months of grazing (July-August), a linear mathematical relationship was established between the residual biomass and grazing duration under CA practice. Under a fixed stocking rate of 30 ewes/ha, the model predicts the residual biomass after any length of grazing time. This represents an important tool for stubble grazing management, since it is possible to decide the duration of grazing according to the biomass required for soil coverage to achieve the mulch effect required under CA.

71


•

Based on 17 wheat and barley stubble grazing trials under CA in Algeria, a grazing tool was developed which estimates the number of grazing days for a given stocking density, ensuring that the residual biomass remains at least 0.6 t/ha. This level of stubble retention, which represents 20 to 25% of the initial biomass, was found to be sufficient to sustain CA. The body condition score of the animals was monitored during the experiments to keep the animals in satisfactory condition throughout the grazing period. Nevertheless, body condition scores need to be closely monitored when the grazing period exceeds 20 days and, in particular, when late-pregnant ewes are allowed to graze the stubbles.

-

The level of capacity development of the participants involved in the project has been quite significant. The targeted activities have assisted in providing project teams with important skills necessary to deliver key project activities and outcomes. The project has been able to engage with young professionals from project teams and NARS. And, importantly, the project has enabled the young professionals to enhance their skills and capabilities through a range of capacity-building and training experiences.

-

Expanding CA practices into traditional crop-livestock production systems requires site-specific adaptation of these practices to farmers’ circumstances. This needs to occur along with the development of alternative feeding and management strategies.

General conclusions In the two targeted North African countries, farmer acceptance of ZT as an alternative technology for the rainfed crop-livestock system is already a reality. The project has been successful in generating momentum, in collaboration with other projects, on improved practices in livestock, forages, and CA. This has improved and addressed the socioeconomic realities on the ground. The project was innovative in developing and testing non-rigid scenarios of integrated CLCA systems, which respond to the constraints and the realities of each of the sites. Systems built on the core elements of CLCA (including ZT sown crops and strategic grazing of stubble residues) show potential for natural resources management benefits. Project publications, training, and student involvement will have a long-lasting effect in disseminating and conducting research on new practices that improve farmers’ lives economically in a sustainable manner. The development of CLCA packages needs the collection of information and knowledge from a range of sources and experiences that need to be ‘defendable’. It is not possible to conduct local research to validate all the concepts and practices required because of limitations in available resources, time, and effort. This is where the application of scientific and practical farming experience is important in developing ‘best management practices’ and applying them as part of structured farmer-group based learning experiences. By adopting core approaches, such as ‘action research’ and participatory based development and extension (engaging farmers as the ‘central stakeholders’), it has been possible to create ‘innovative platforms’. These can help to enhance and develop new ideas and support farmers in the change process associated with developing, adapting, and introducing CLCA systems. For example, over 500,000 farmers in Tunisia are involved in agricultural production. The majority are small landholders, who struggle to maintain their livelihoods mainly through crop and livestock production. It is evident from the representative sample that was involved in the project in the target areas, that they were extremely motivated by and appreciative of the on-farm demonstrations and trials conducted by the project. The interest in forming local discussion groups among those farmers in Tunisia who have been involved in the on-farm demonstrations will be the backbone of these innovative platforms. A major limitation for measuring environmental benefits is that, by the official end of the project, only results from two full crop seasons were available. Thus, it is not possible to provide conclusive results on the environmental benefits. It should be noted that while this completion report was being drafted, some laboratory analyses were still on-going (soil analysis and digestibility) or had not yet started (meat


quality). Further to this, the development of CLCA packages is relatively complex, and needs to take into consideration a wide range of interacting components. These include: •

Best practice agronomic and livestock management

•

Integrated pest, weed, and disease management (across crop rotations and extending for a number of years)

•

Risk management and decision support frameworks for farmers (including simple, but realistic, detailed economic analysis, minimizing production risk, and providing clear market signals from a market chain approach)

•

Adapting and modifying CA practices according to local physical, social, and economic constraints.

Fortunately, the participating countries, in particular Tunisia and Algeria, have decided to continue the ongoing on-station and on-farm trials during the 2015/16 and into the 2016/17 cropping seasons. Data to be collected during the bridging period are crucial for consolidation of the results so far achieved. ICARDA will support this bridging period through remote technical backstopping. The contribution of IFAD has made this work possible and research efforts will continue in the years to come. Box 12. New policies and institutional options that may favor the uptake of CA technologies in CWANA •

Scaling up CA practices requires efforts to adapt the CA principles and technological aspects to fit various agro-ecological zones, and socioeconomic and farming systems in the region. It will need greater support from stakeholders, including policy and decision makers at the local, national, and regional levels to facilitate expansion of CA and help farmers achieve more benefits from this technology

•

Develop a systematic monitoring of the socioeconomic, environmental, and institutional changes. This monitoring should become an integral part of any major projects on CA

•

Policy support for capacity development by organizing training courses on CA is needed (for researchers, extension agents, leader-farmers, etc.) especially for Tajikistan

•

Institutionalization of CA. CA has to be mainstreamed in the relevant Ministries (Agriculture, Environment and Water), departments, or institutions (NARS). It must be supported by adequate provision of material, human, and financial resources to ensure that farmers receive effective and timely support from well-trained and motivated extension staff

•

Adaptive research. Support for the adaptation and validation of CA technologies in local environments is required to adapt CA principles and practices to the local conditions

•

CA equipment. Support for the development of CA equipment is needed to ensure its availability

•

Building partnerships. CA systems are very complex and their efficient management needs understanding of the basic processes and the component interactions, which determine system performance

•

Providing credit and subsidies. For the successful adoption of CA there is a need to provide credit to farmers to buy equipment, machinery (seeders), and inputs through banks and credit agencies at reasonable interest rates. For resource-poor farmers, governments need to provide a subsidy for the purchase of such equipment (the case of Tajikistan).

72

73 ANNEXES

Policy for Grant Financing: Implementing Procedures | Stage III/9.1/Template | Annexes

74


Annex 1. Group training courses NUMBER OF FEMALE COMPONENT PARTICIPANTS

TOPIC

PLACE

Machinery and ZT technologies

Algeria

20

0

1

Socioeconomic rapid rural survey

Algeria

23

5

1

Focus group to assess adoption of CA using ADOPT tool

Algeria

62

1

1


Tajikistan

25

10

1


Tajikistan

45

14

1

Socioeconomic training

Jordan

3

2

1

Methodological training workshop (Tajik NARES partners). Data management and data analysis using SPSS

Jordan

2

1

1

Methodological training workshop (Algerian NARES partners). Data management and data analysis using SPSS and ADOPT

Jordan

10

7

1


Tunisia

19

2

1


Tunisia

19

2

1

New techniques for sustainable sheep and goat production

Jordan

16

3

2

Agro-ecological monitoring

Jordan

5

3

2

Alley cropping

Jordan

5

3

2

Feed assessment tool – FEAST (conducted by Jane Wamatu)

Tunisia

21

14

2

FEAST (conducted by national team)

Tunisia

40

0

2

Principals and applications of effective rangeland management

Jordan

1

1

2

Forage production

Algeria

30

16

2

Weed management

Algeria

4

4

2&3

Weed management, no-till equipment and forage production

Tajikistan

26

0

2&3

Crop production under CA

Tajikistan

17

3

3

Crop rotation

Tunisia

20

Machinery modification for two trialed John Shearer seeders

Algeria

10

0

3

Soil and irrigation

Algeria

30

14

3

Proposal, management, and reporting of research-development projects

Jordan

1

0

General

Interviewing techniques

Tunisia

4

0

General

Designing experimental protocols

Tunisia

10

0

General

Scientific writing

Tunisia

1

1

General

Advanced MS Office Excel

Tunisia

1

1

General

‛Sensibilisation à la qualité et à la métrologie’ (Awareness of quality and measurement)

Tunisia

1

1

General

471

108

Total

3

75


Annex 2. Field days ALGERIA

TUNISIA

TAJIKISTAN

TOTAL

7

4

7

18

502

190

421

1,113

Number of field days Total number of participants

Annex 3. Student involvement COUNTRIES

ALGERIA

TUNISIA

TAJIKISTAN

BSc-MSc

PhD

BSc-MSc

PhD

BSc-MSc

PhD

4 females

0

2 (1 male, 1 female)

0

0

0

Integrated crop-livestock

0

0

5 females

2 females

0

1 male

CA

0

0

1 male

2 males

0

0

Socioeconomic

Total

4

12

1

Annex 4. Scientific production Summary of publications MEDIA (TV)

WEB LINK (BLOG)

TOTAL

6

0

1

17

4

1

1

0

7

6

2

1

2

0

13

0

1

0

2

0

1

4

6

12

10

10

3

1

41

TYPE

ISI PAPERS

CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

Tunisia

2

5

4

Algeria

2

0

Tajikistan

2

Across countries Total

POSTERS FACTSHEETS

ISI – International scientific indexing

Manuscripts (6) 1. Moujahed N., Abidi S., Ben Youssef S., Darej, C., Chakroun, M. and Ben Salem, M. 2015. Effect of stocking rate on biomass variation and lamb performances for barley stubble in Tunisian semi-arid region and under conservation agriculture conditions. African Journal of Agricultural Research 10(50): 4584–4590. 2. Moujahed et al., (in progress). Effect of agricultural practices (conventional or conservation agriculture) and stocking rates on biomass dynamics and performance of Barbarine ewes grazing on wheat stubble in Tunisian semi-arid conditions. 3. Nurbekov, A., Ergasheva, T., Dhehibi, B., Kassam, A. and Ben Salem, H. (in press). Economics of planting methods on double cropped mung bean in the irrigated conditions of Tajikistan. Journal of Economics. 4. Asoev N.A., Ibragimov N.I., Nurbekov A.I., Yatimov B.N., and Khomatov A., 2015. Winter wheat productivity under different tillage methods. Journal of Tajik Academy of Science. 5. Guesmi H., Moujahed N. and Ben Salem: Conservation agriculture-livestock interactions: current challenge – a review (in progress)


6. Ghalem Djender Z., and Boukhobza N., 2015 Caractérisation socio-économique de deux communes de la wilaya de M'Sila (Ain Khadra et Ouled Mansour), et adoption de l’agriculture de conservation au niveau de ces communes. Céréaliculture 65: 37–64.

Conference papers (11) 7. Angar H. 2014 Comparison of soil compaction under conventional agriculture and conservation agriculture practices. The 6th World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, Winnipeg, Canada. 8. Angar H. 2014. Adoption of conservation agriculture in Tunisia: approaches and strategies implemented. The 6th World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, Winnipeg, Canada. 9. Angar H. 2014. Dynamics of soil organic matter, organic carbon and organic nitrogen under notillage. The 6th World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, Winnipeg, Canada. 10. Cicek H. 2014. can grazing make organic no-till possible? The 6th World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, Winnipeg, Canada. 11. Guesmi H., Moujahed N., Ben Youssef S, Darej C, Chakroun M, Abidi S, and Ben Salem H. 2015. Effect of agriculture practices and stocking rates on performances of Barbarine ewes grazing on wheat stubble in Tunisian semi-arid conditions. In: Première édition de la Conférence Internationale sur l’agriculture et la biotechnologie, Tunisie, 2-3 Novembre 2015. 12. Nurbekov A., Ergasheva T., Boubaker D., Cicek H., and Ben Salem H. 2015. Attitudes towards conservation agriculture practices in Tajikistan. The role of agriculture in food security conference. 12 September 2015. Dushanbe, Tajikistan. Pp. 292. ISBN 978-99975-48-73-3. 13. Nurbekov A., Kassam A., Musaev A., Sydyk D., Ziyadullaev Z., Feindel D., Muminjanov H., and Turok J. 2015. Effect of tillage methods on productivity of winter wheat in the irrigated conditions Central Asia and the Caucasus. 18th International Soil Conservation Organization Conference 31 May 31–5 June 2015, El Paso, Texas, USA. 14. Nurbekov A., Kassam A., Mirzabaev A, Turok J., Sydyk D., and Ziyadullaev Z. 2015. Possible role for conservation agriculture in climate change adaptation and mitigation in Central Asia: a preliminary review. Agriculture and Climate Change in Transition Economies. 17–19 June 2015. Halle (Saale), Germany. 15. Nurbekov A., Ergasheva T., Dhehibi B., Kassam A., and Ben Salem H. 2014. Conservation agriculture as a sustainable option for addressing land and water problems in Central Asia. The 6th World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, Winnipeg, Canada 16. Nurbekov A., Ergasheva T., Dhehibi B., Kassam A., and Ben Salem H. 2014. Can conservation agriculture address land and water challenges in Central Asia? Regional Economic Cooperation in Central Asia: Agricultural Production and Trade (ReCCA), 24–26 November, 2014, Halle (Saale), Germany. 17. Nurbekov A., Kassam A., Feindel D., Muminjanov H., Turok J., Sydyk D., and Ziyadullaev Z. 2014. Status of conservation agriculture in Central Asia. The 6th World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, Winnipeg, Canada.

76

77


Annex 5. Teams involved in CLCA project by country and organization PARTICIPANTS

ORGANIZATION/ COUNTRY

SPECIALTY

E-MAIL

INRAT/Tunisia 1

Hichem Lakhdhar

CRDA Siliana

Water resource and development

[email protected]

2

Mohamed Chakroun

INRAT

Forage production

chakroun.mohamed@iresa. agrinet.tn

3

Salah Benyoussef

INRAT

Forage production

[email protected]

4

Sourour Abidi

INRAT

Animal nutrition

[email protected]

5

Noura Benyoussef

INRAT

Plant pathology

[email protected]

6

Mohamed Annabi

INRAT

Soil science

[email protected]

7

Hatem Cheick Mhamed

INRAT

Agronomy/CA

[email protected]

8

Hamed Daly

INRAT

Economy

[email protected]. tn

9

Mohamed Ali Hannachi

INGC

10

Houcine Angar

INGC

Agronomy/CA

[email protected]

11

Hatem Chaar

INAT

Agroforestry

[email protected]

12

Nizar Moujahed

INAT

Livestock production

[email protected]

13

Ayoub Fouzai

ESA Mograne

Agricultural and resources economics

[email protected]

14

Aymen Frija

ESA Mograne

Agricultural and resources economics

[email protected]

Agronomy/ Technology transfer

[email protected]

ITGC/Algeria 14

Faiza Djellakh

ITGC

ITGC/Coordinator

[email protected]

15

Zahra GhalemDjender

ITGC

ITGC/Agroeconomist

[email protected]

16

Djamel Sersoub

ITGC

ITGC/Director Sétif ITGC experimental station

[email protected]

17

Kheireddine Sekour

Ministry of Agriculture

Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development/Arid and semi-arid zones

[email protected]

18

Aissa Sahraoui

HCDS

Commissaire Régional – HCDS

[email protected]

19

Hamza Benmakhlouf

ITLEV

Livestock Technical Institute/Station Ain M'Lila

[email protected]

20

Ali ChikoucheHamina

DSA

Direction des Services Agricoles de M’Sila

[email protected]

78


PARTICIPANTS

ORGANIZATION/ COUNTRY

SPECIALTY

E-MAIL

ITGC/Algeria 21

Ammar Zahaf

DGF/IFAD

Conservation des forêts de M’Sila/ Member of IFAD Mountain project

[email protected]

Tajikistan Hukmatullo Ahmadov

TAAS

National Project Coordinator

23

Tanzila Ergasheva

Tajik Research Institute of Agricultural Economics

Socioeconomics

[email protected]

24

Tolibbek Bukhoriev

TAAS

Forage and livestock

[email protected]

25

Saiydzamol Saidov

Tajik Research Institute of Farming

CA

22

ICARDA Director, DSIPS 26

Hichem Ben Salem

ICARDA

(Project Coordinator, starting 2 January 2014)

[email protected]

27

David Feindl

ICARDA

Acting Director DSIPS (Project coordinator until 31 December 2013)

28

Barbara Rischkowsky

ICARDA

Principal Livestock scientist and SIRPS director

[email protected]

29

Serkan Ates

ICARDA

Forage Scientist. DSIPSP

[email protected]

30

Mounir Louhaichi

ICARDA

Rangeland ecology and management DSIPSP

[email protected]

31

Jane Wamatu

ICARDA

Animal nutritionist, DSIPS

[email protected]

32

Boubaker Dhehibi

ICARDA

Agricultural resource economist, SEPRP

[email protected]

33

Aziz Nurbekov

ICARDA

Project Regional Coordinator

[email protected]

34

Harun Cicek

ICARDA

PDF Agronomy

[email protected]

35

Mohammed El Mourid

ICARDA

Regional Coordinator, NARP

[email protected]

36

Jozef Turok

ICARDA

Regional Coordinator

[email protected]

37

Mourad Rekik

ICARDA

Small ruminant scientist, DSIPS

[email protected]

38

Aymen Frija

ICARDA

Economist, SEPRP

[email protected]

[email protected]

79


CRDA – Commissariat Régional au Développement Agricole DGF – Direction Générale des Forêts DSA – Direction des Services Agricoles DSIPS – Diversification and Sustainable Intensification of Production Systems ESA Mograne – Ecole Supérieure d'Agriculture Mograne HCDS – Haut-Commissariat au Développement de la Steppe INAT – Institut National Agronomique de Tunisie ITLEV – Institut Technique de l’Elevage SEPRP – Socioeconomic and Policy Research Program SIRPS – Sustainable Intensification and Resilient Production Systems